Shelf.., 

oi 

PRINCETON,    K.    J.                       -^^ 

Section . :  .C?.  /rri  .7!  .7. 

Number. .y.j.k: 

THE 

International   Revision  Commentary 

ON  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 


By  British  and  American  Scholars  and  Revisers.    Edited 
by  PHILIP  SCHAFF,  D.  D. 


I.    THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  ST.  MATTHEW.     By  Philip  Schaff, 

D.  D.    One  volume.     16mo.     With  a  Map.    $1.25. 
II.    THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING    TO   MARK.      By  Profes^r  Matthew  B. 
Riddle.     One  volume.    16mo.     Witli  a  Map.     $1.00. 

III.  THE  GOSPEL   ACCORDING   TO    LUKE,     By  Professor  Matthew  B. 

Riddle.     One  volume.     16mo.    $1.25. 

IV.  THE  GOSPEL  ACCORDING  TO  JOHN.     By  William  Milligan,  D.  D. 

and  William  F.  Moulton,  D.  D.     One  volume.     16mo.     $1.25. 

V.    THE  ACTS  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  By  Dean  Howson  and  Canon  Spence. 

One  volume.     16mo.     With  a  Map.    $1.25. 
VI.    THE  EPISTLE  TO  THE  ROMANS.  By  Professor  Matthe-^  B.  Riddle. 
One  volume.    16mo.    $1.00. 


This  13  the  only  commentary  upon  the  Bevised  Tersicm  of  the  New  Testament.  The  Revised 
Version  is  based  npou  a  much  older  and  purer  text  than  tho  Old  V^ersion,  and  corrects  several 
thous  nd  errors  of  the  latter  ;  this  makes  it  the  be«t  basis  for  a  commentary. 

The  International  Revision  Commentary  contains  the  latest  and  best  evangelical  criticism  and 
exj.lanation  of  the  sacred  text,  and  is  espicially  adapted  for  fc  unday  School  use. 

It  is  hrief,  cJ«ar  and  suggestive,  and  accordint;  to  the  gfueral  verdict,  the  volumes  that  have 
appeared  are  the  ctieapest  and  best  single  commentaries  on  the  Gospels  and  Acts  in  the  English 
language. 


THE 


isMMiML  ifiii  mwsm 

ON  THE 

NEW  TESTAMENT 

Based  upon  the  Revised  Version  of  1881 
BY 

ENGLISH    AND    AMERICAN    SCHOLARS 

AND   MEMBERS  OF  THE   REVISION   COMMITTEE 


PHILIP  SCHAFF,  D.D,  LL.D. 


>ITED   BY 


Professor  of  Sacred  Literature  in  ike  Union  Theological  Seminary  of  New   York, 
President  of  the  American  Committee  on  Revision. 


Vol.  YI. 

THE    EPISTLE    TO    THE    ROMANS 

By  Pbof.  M.  B.  EIDDLE 


NEW    YORK 
CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 

1884 


Copyright  1883,  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBXER'S  SONS. 

(All  rights  Reserved.) 


THE  EPISTLE  OF  PAUL 


ROMANS 


EXPLAINED  BY 


MATTHEW  B.   EIDDLE,   D.  D. 

Professor  of  iV.  T.  Exegesis  in  the  Theological  Seminary,  at  Eariford,  Conn. 
Member  of  the  New  Testament  Company  of  American  Revisers, 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS 

1884 


PE 
PEEFACE.  ' 


The  present  volume,  like  the  others  of  the  International  Re- 
vision series,  contains  the  notes  already  published  in  the  *  Popu- 
lar Illustrated  Commentary,'  adapted  to  the  text  of  the  Revised 
Version.  Additions  have,  however,  been  made,  from  recent 
exegetical  works,  and  from  the  results  of  renewed  personal 
study. 

In  assuming,  formally,  the  literary  responsibility  for  the  fol- 
lowing pages,  the  writer  desires  to  express  his  indebtedness  to 
Dr.  Schaff,  for  the  privilege  of  using,  at  discretion,  his  numerous 
critical  and  doctrinal  additions  to  the  volume  on  Romans  in  the 
American  edition  of  Lange's  Commentary.  Special  acknowl- 
edgment will  be  found,  whenever  in  the  present  volume  ex- 
tended use  has  been  made  of  the  contributions  of  Dr.  Schaff 
to  the  work  just  named ;  in  which,  it  may  be  added,  the  greater 
number  of  the  emendations  in  Romans,  accepted  by  the  Revis- 
ers, already  appeared. 

No  one  can  doubt  that  great  advances  have  been  made  in 
recent  years,  toward  a  more  exact  interpretation  of  this  Epistle ; 
yet  on  the  eve  of  celebrating  the  four  hundredth  anniversary  of 
Luther's  birth,  modern  scholarship  gladly  acknowledges  that 
the  great  Reformer  caught  the  true  significance  of  this  great 
Epistle.  This  little  volume  seeks  to  hold  firmly  the  same  main 
position,  but  also  to  put  the  English  reader  in  possession  of  the 
results  of  scholarly  labor  in  this  century. 

Fifteen  years  of  special  study  devoted  to  this  Epistle  lead 
the  writer  to  appreciate  the  more  keenly  how  much  greater 
it  is,  than  all  commentaries. 

M.  B.  Riddle. 

Hartford  Theological  Seminary, 
October,  1883. 


I.  GENEEAli  INTEODUOTIOIS" 

TO    THE 

EPISTLES  OF  PAUL. 


g  1.  Life  of  Paul.    §  2.  Character  of  Paul.    ^  3.  Chronolo- 
gical Order  of  the  Epistles.     §  4.  Character  of  the 
Epistles. 

^  1.  Life  of  the  Apostle} 

The  great  Apostle  of  the  Gentiles  is  the  author  of  the  much 
larger  half  of  the  didactic  portion  of  the  New  Testament,  while  his 
labors  form  the  subject  of  the  larger  half  of  the  one  historical  book, 
which  tells  of  the  spread  of  Christianity.  He  was  the  instrument 
chosen  to  give  the  religion  of  Christ  the  wider  range,  both  of 
thought  and  of  territory,  for  which  it  was  designated.  Hence  a 
failure  to  apprehend  his  life  and  character  necessarily  involves 
ignorance  of  the  historical  beginnings  of  Christianity,  both  as  a 
system  and  as  a  vital  force  in  the  world. 

Paul,  whose  Hebrew  name  was  Saul,^  the  son  of  Jewish  parents, 

1  The  two  great  English  works  on  the  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  by  Conybeare 
and  Howson  (in  numerous  editions),  and  by  Thomas  Lewin,  have  recently  been  sup- 
plemented by  a  third,  from  the  pen  of  Canon  Farrar  (1879),  which  is  more  critical 
than  either  of  the  others,  dealing  less  with  the  environments  of  the  great  Apostle, 
but  seeking  to  enter  more  fully  into  his  inner  history.  It  has  not  been  deemed 
necessary  to  refer  to  these,  except  when  directly  cited.  The  History  of  the  Christian 
Church,  by  the  general  editor,  and  the  volume  on  Bomans,  in  Lange's  Commentary, 
give  the  details  in  regard  to  most  of  the  points  here  touched  upon.  The  proper 
articles  in  the  Schaff-Herzog  Encyclopiedia,  in  Smith's  Bible  Dictionary,  and  kindred 
works,  will  be  consulted  by  those  who  are  interested  in  special  questions. 

2  The  name  '  Saul '  occurs  in  the  Acts  up  to  chap.  13:  9,  where  in  the  presence  of 
Sergius  Paulus,  the  Roman  proconsul,  the  Apostle  rebukes  the  Jewish  sorcerer ;  here 
we  read :  '  Saul  (who  is  also  called  Paul) ; '  afterwards  the  name  '  Paul '  is  exclu- 

vii 


INTRODUCTION. 


of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  (Phil.  3  :  5  ;  2  Cor.  11 :  22),  was  a  native 
of  Tarsus,  in  Cilicia,  a  city  of  commercial  and  literary  renown.  He 
therefore  belonged  to  the  '  Dispersion,'  to  the  Hellenistic  (or,  Greek 
speaking)  Jews,  whose  peculiarities  of  religious  expression  were 
moulded  by  the  Septuagint.  That  he  was  by  birth  a  Roman  citi- 
zen appears  from  Acts  16:  37;  22:  28.  His  theological  educa- 
tion was  received  in  the  school  of  the  famous  Pharisee,  Gamaliel 
(Acts  22  :  3  ;  26:  4,  5  ;  comp.  Acts  5  :  34,  etc.).  Whether  he  was 
learned  in  Greek  literature  has  been  much  disputed,  but  that  he 
was  not  ignorant  of  Hellenic  philosophy  and  poetry  is  clear  from 
Acts  17  :25  ;  1  Cor.  15  :  32  ;  Tit.  1 :  12.  Yet  his  Epistles  show  that 
the  controlling  human  element  in  his  training  was  that  of  the  Rab- 
binical school  of  Gamaliel.^  This  is  but  fitting,  on  any  theory 
which  recognizes  the  place  of  the  Jewish  people  in  the  history  of 
Redemption.  Whatever  of  truth  that  people  conserved  was  held 
by  the  Pharisees ;  and  among  the  Pharisees  who  appear  at  that 
epoch,  Gamaliel  is  preeminent.  '  Thus,  a  "  Hebrew  of  the  He- 
brews," yet  at  the  same  time  a  native  Hellenist,  and  a  Roman  citi- 
zen, he  combined  in  himself,  so  to  speak,  the  three  great  nationali- 
ties of  the  ancient  world,  and  was  endowed  with  all  the  natural 
qualifications  for  a  universal  apostleship.'  ^     But  while  he  possessed 

sively  used.  There  are  two  views:  (1.)  that  there  was  a  change  of  name  at  this 
time,  in  commemoration  of  the  conversion  of  the  proconsul;  (2.)  that  the  Apostle 
had  two  names,  being  commonly  known  among  the  Gentile  churches  by  the  Latin 
(or,  Hellenistic)  name,  which  the  historian  uses  exclusively  after  the  Apostle  is 
brought  in  contact  with  the  Gentiles.  Against  (1.)  is  the  fact  that  Sergius  Paulus 
was  not  yet  converted  at  the  time  when  the  name  '  Paul '  first  appears ;  and  that 
teachers  are  not  named  after  their  pupils,  but  the  reverse ;  in  favor  of  (2.)  is  the  fact 
that  it  was  customary  with  the  Jews  to  have  two  names,  and  in  intercourse  with 
Gentiles  to  use  the  Greek  or  Latin  one  (Acts  12:  12,25;  13:  1-7;  Col.  4 :  11:  see, 
also,  the  lists  of  the  Apostles).  To  explain  the  change  as  due  to  Paul's  own  conver- 
sion is  unwarranted,  since  the  name  '  Saul '  occurs  in  the  narrative  of  events  eight 
years  later. 

1  From  Acts  26  :  10,  where  *  voice '  means  *  vote,'  it  has  been  inferred  that  Saul  of 
Tarsua  was  a  member  of  the  Sanhedrin,  when  Stephen  was  tried.  This  would  im- 
ply that  he  had  been  married.  It  is  diflScult  to  establish  so  important  a  point  on  so 
slight  evidence.  In  Gal.  1:  14,  some  allu,«ion  to  such  a  position  might  have  been 
expected,  had  Paul  been  a  member  of  the  Sanhedrin.  But  in  favor  of  this  view,  see 
Lewin,  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Panl,  1,  p.  14,  and  elsewhere.  Canon  Farrar  adopts  the 
same  opinion,  with  inferences.  The  last-named  author  is  quite  full  on  the  Rabbini- 
cal training  of  the  Apostle  {St.  Pmtl,  1,  chap.  3,  and  elsewhere  throughout). 

2Schaff,  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  1,  p.  287. 


INTRODUCTION. 


'natural  qualifications'  only, — in  the  absence  of  gracious  qualifica- 
tions,— he  became  '  a  blasphemer,  and  a  persecutor,  and  injurious  ' 
(1  Tim.  1:  13),  appearing  first  in  the  New  Testament  narrative  as 
a  young  man  zealous  for  the  death  of  the  first  Christian  martyr, 
Stephen  (Acts  7:  58;  8:  1).  He  seems,  after  this,  to  have  put 
himself  at  the  head  of  the  persecution  (Acts  8  :  3  ;  9  :  1,  2)  ;  and, 
having  obtained  authority  from  the  high-priest,  was  on  his  way  to 
Damascus,  to  lay  hold  of  the  Christians  he  might  find  there,  when 
the  hand  of  Divine  grace  laid  hold  of  him.  That  Jesus  whom,  in 
the  persons  of  His  disciples,  he  was  persecuting,  appeared  to  him 
and  transformed  the  persecutor  into  a  humble  disciple. 

The  importance  of  this  occurrence  is  indicated  by  the  repeated 
accounts  in  the  Acts  (9:  1-19;  22:  3-16;  26:  19-20),  as  well  as 
the  numerous  allusions  to  it  in  the  Pauline  Epistles,  especially  Gal. 
1 :  11-16.  That  there  was  a  real  objective  appearance  of  Christ  is 
proven  from  1  Cor.  15 :  8,  and  by  the  failure  to  account  for  the 
transformation  on  any  other  theory.  Whatever  may  have  been  the 
preparation  for  this  office,  which  Paul  received  from  his  previous 
training,  his  conversion  was  a  complete  transformation  of  his  life. 

The  relation  of  Paul  to  the  original  twelve  Apostles  is  open  to 
discussion.  There  are  two  theories:  (1.)  That  Paul  was  the 
twelfth  Apostle,  properly  taking  the  place  vacated  by  Judas  ;  (2.) 
That  there  were  twelve  Apostles  from  the  Jews  (including  Matthias), 
and  that  Paul  was  a  distinct  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  The  latter 
is  the  more  tenable  view,  but  must  not  be  made  the  basis  of  a  con- 
tinuance and  succession  in  the  Apostolic  office.  '  The  divine  irre- 
gularity of  his  call,  and  the  subsequent  independence  of  his  labors 
make  Paul,  so  to  speak,  a  prototype  of  evangelical  Protestantism, 
which  has  always  looked  to  him  as  its  main  authority,  as  Romanism 
to  Peter.i     (SchafiT,  Apostolic  Church,  p.  234.) 

The  conversion  of  Paul  may  be  regarded  as  his  call  to  the  Apos- 

1  The  theorips  of  Dr.  Baur,  of  Tubingen,  and  his  followers,  which  '  represent  the 
gospel  of  Paul  as  having  originated  from  the  intrinsic  action  of  his  own  mind,  and 
the  event  at  Damascus  as  a  visionary  picture  drawn  f  om  his  own  spirit '  (Meyer), 
have  been  repeatedly  answered.  Indeed,  'after  a  renewed  investigation  of  the 
subject,  the  celebrated  historian  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  the  conversion  of 
Paul  was  an  enigma,  which  cannot  be  satisfactorily  solved  by  any  psychological  or 
dialectic  analysis '  (Schaff,  in  Lange,  Romans,  p.  5). 


INTRODUCTION. 


tolic  ofiSce,  but  he  did  not  enter  fully  on  his  Apostolic  work  until 
seven  years  later  (Acts  13:12).  He  had,  indeed,  three  years  after 
his  conversion,  received  in  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  a  direct  reve- 
lation of  his  mission  to  the  Gentiles  (Acts  22:  lV-21),  and  had 
preached  at  Damascus,  apparently  soon  after  he  recovered  his  sight 
(Acts  9:  19,  20).  'For  all  half-heartedness  was  foreign  to  him; 
now,  too,  he  was,  whatever  he  was,  thoroughly^  and  the  energetic 
unity  of  his  profound  nature  was  now  sanctified  throughout  by  the 
living  spirit  of  Christ'  (Meyer).  However,  this  activity  was  not 
long  continued,  for  he  himself  tells  of  his  withdrawal  to  Arabia 
(Gal.  1 :  17).  This  was  doubtless  for  the  purpose  of  retirement,  a 
sort  of  substitution  for  a  three  years'  intercourse  with  the  Lord, 
enjoyed  by  the  other  Apostles.  (Compare  Gal.  1 :  19.)  Return- 
ing to  Damascus  he  became  the  object  of  Jewish  persecution 
(Acts  9  :  23,  25  5  2  Cor.  11 :  32,  33),  but  escaped  to  Jerusalem, 
where  he  encountered  the  doubt,  if  not  the  suspicion,  of  the  disci- 
pies  (Acts  9:  2^).  At  this  time  he  met  the  Apostle  Peter  (Gal. 
1 :  18,  19),  but  seems  not  to  have  gained  the  full  confidence  of  the 
other  Apostles,  until  his  labors  among  the  heathen  bore  such 
fruit  as  to  place  his  Divine  call  and  peculiar  mission  beyond  all 
doubt.  Even  during  his  fifteen  days'  stay  at  Jerusalem  he  incurred 
the  enmity  of  the  Hellenistic  Jews,  and  departed  to  Tarsus  to 
escape  their  plots.  From  Tarsus  he  came  to  Antioch,  after  an 
interval  of  a  few  years,  having  been  brought  there  by  Barnabas 
(Acts  11 :  25,  26),  with  whom  he  was  associated  in  carrying  alms 
to  the  church  at  Jerusalem  (Acts  11 :  29,  30).  Shortly  afterwards 
(a.  d.  45),  he  began  his  wider  missionary  activity.  Luke,  his  com- 
panion, mentions  in  the  Acts  three  great  missionary  journeys  of  the 
Apostle  to  the  Gentiles. 

1.  He  set  out  (a.  d.  45)  under  the  special  direction  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  given  through  the  prophets  and  the  congregation  at  Antioch. 
His  companions  were  Barnabas  and  John  Mark  (Acts  13:  15; 
comp.  16  :  37).  Landing  at  Salamis,  in  Cyprus,  they  traversed  the 
island  from  east  to  west.  At  Paphos  they  encountered  a  Jewish 
sorcerer,  whom  Paul  rebuked  and  punished,  the  result  being  the 
conversion  of  the  Roman  proconsul  Sergius  Paulus,  who  had  been 
the  patron  of  Elymas  (Acts  13:  5-12).     They  departed  thence  to 


INTRODUCTION. 


Perga,  where  Mark  deserted  them  (Acts  13 :  13).  At  Antioch,  in 
Pisidia,  the  next  important  point  to  which  they  journeyed,  the  first 
marked  success  of  the  gospel  occurred,  accompanied  by  the  bitter 
opposition  of  unbelieving  Jews.  A  careful  study  of  the  account 
(Acts  13:  14-52)  reveals  all  the  marked  characteristics  of  the 
whole  religious  movement  inaugurated  by  Paul  and  Barnabas. 
Henceforth  Paul's  mission  was  to  the  Gentiles,  although  he  never 
ceased  to  put  forth  efforts  for  his  kinsmen  according  to  the  flesh. 
The  leading  incidents  of  the  remainder  of  this  journey  were :  the 
miracle  of  healing  a  cripple  at  Lystra ;  the  attempt  at  idolatrous 
worship  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  by  the  superstitious  Lystrians ;  the 
sudden  change  into  hatred  against  them  at  the  same  place,  insti- 
gated by  Jews  from  Antioch  and  Iconium ;  the  stoning  of  the  mis- 
sionaries ;  their  escape  from  death ;  their  successful  return  to 
Antioch. 

2.  At  the  Apostolic  Council  in  Jerusalem  (a.  d.  50),  the  differ- 
ence between  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christianity  was  discussed  and 
adjusted,  Paul  being  present  as  a  living  witness  to  his  own  success 
among  the  Gentiles  (Acts  15).  The  second  missionary  journey 
was  undertaken  in  the  year  51,  by  Paul,  independently  of  Barnabas ; 
Mark  being  the  occasion  of  their  separation.  Having  visited  his 
old  churches  in  Syria  and  Cilicia,  he  proceeded,  with  the  help  of  a 
young  convert,  Timothy  (Acts  16:  1-3),  to  establish  new  ones 
throughout  Phrygia  and  Galatia.  A  special  intervention  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  compelled  them  to  journey  unto  Troas,  when,  in  obe- 
dience to  a  heavenly  vision,  and  in  answer  to  the  Macedonian  cry : 
'Come  over  and  help  us,'  he  crossed  into  Greece  (Acts  16 :  6-12). 
In  Greece  (the  Roman  provinces  of  Macedonia  and  Achaia)  he 
proceeded  with  great  success,  the  seal  of  the  Divine  approval  of  his 
universal  mission.  At  Philippi,  the  first  city  where  he  labored  in 
Europe,  a  purple  dealer,  named  Lydia,  was  the  first  to  embrace  the 
new  religion.  There  he  came  in  conflict  with  heathen  superstition, 
and  was  imprisoned  with  Silas,  but  was  miraculously  delivered,  and 
honorably  released.  Luke  seems  to  have  been  of  the  company, 
from  Troas  to  Philippi,  where  he  probably  remained  until  Paul's 
final  journey  to  Jerusalem.  (Compare  Acts  16  :  10;  17:  1;  20: 
5.)     The  next  place  of  activity  was  Thessalonica,  where  he  was 


INTRODUCTION. 


persecuted  by  Jews,  but  left  a  flourishing  church,  to  which  he 
wrote  his  earliest  Epistles.  While  laboring  at  Beroea,  the  enmity 
of  Jews  from  Thessalonica  drove  Paul  away  to  Athens,  where  he 
reasoned  with  Stoic  and  Epicurean  philosophers,  and  delivered,  on 
Mars'  hill,  a  remarkable  discourse,  without  great  result  on  the 
spot,  although  its  effect  is  still  felt  everywhere.  Coming  to  Corinth, 
his  labors  assumed  a  more  settled  character.  This  city  was  the 
commercial  centre  between  the  East  and  West,  a  flourishing  seat 
of  wealth  and  civilization.  Here  he  spent  eighteen  months,  and, 
despite  great  obstacles,  built  up  a  church,  which  exhibited  all  the 
virtues  and  all  the  follies  of  the  Grecian  character,  under  the  in- 
fluence of  the  gospel.  The  two  important  Epistles  written  to  this 
Christian  congregation  show  us  more  fully  than  any  other  docu- 
ments the  inner  life  of  the  early  Church.  In  the  spring  of  54,  he 
returned,  by  way  of  Ephesus,  Csesarea,  and  Jerusalem,  to  Antioch. 

3.  Towards  the  close  of  the  same  year  Paul  went  to  Ephesus. 
In  this  renowned  city,  the  capital  of  proconsular  Asia,  he  labored 
successfully  for  three  years,  and  then  visited  the  churches  in  Mace- 
donia and  Achaia,  remaining  three  months  in  Corinth  and  the  vici- 
nity. During  this  period  were  written  the  Epistles  to  the  Galatians, 
to  the  Corinthians,  and  to  the  Romans.  From  these  we  see  what 
hostile  influences  of  Jewish  origin  opposed  the  Apostle  in  his 
labors. 

4.  The  last  (fifth)  journey  to  Jerusalem  was  made  by  the  Apostle 
in  the  spring  of  58,  for  the  purpose  of  carrying  to  the  poor  brethren 
in  Judea  a  contribution  from  the  Christians  of  Greece  (Rom.  15 : 
25,  26;  compare  1  Cor.  16:  1-3).  The  route  traversed  by  the 
Apostle  was  through  Philippi,  Troas,  and  Miletus  (where  he  de- 
livered his  affectionate  valedictory  to  the  Ephesian  elders).  Tyre,  and 
Coesarea.  The  time  of  his  arrival  at  Jerusalem  was  shortly  before 
Pentecost,  when  the  city  was  thronged  with  Jews  from  all  regions. 
Some  of  the  brethren  at  Jerusalem  suggested  to  him,  as  a  matter  of 
prudence,  to  appear  in  the  Temple  with  certain  Nazarites  to  prove 
the  falsity  of  the  charge  made  against  him,  that  he  taught  the  Hel- 
lenistic Jews  to  forsake  the  law  of  Moses.  While  in  the  Temple 
some  fanatical  Jews  from  Asia  raised  an  uproar  against  him,  charg- 
ing him  with  profaning  the  Temple ;  they  dragged  him  out  of  the 


INTRODUCTION. 


sacred  enclosure,  lest  he  should  defile  it  with  his  blood,  and  were 
about  to  kill  him,  when  Claudius  Lysias,  the  Roman  tribune,  hear- 
ing the  uproar,  appeared  with  his  soldiers.  This  ofiicer  released 
Paul  from  the  mob,  sent  him  to  the  Sanhedrin,  and,  after  a 
stormy  and  fruitless  session  of  this  body  and  the  discovery  of  a  plot 
against  his  life,  sent  him  with  a  strong  guard  and  a  letter  implying 
his  innocence,  to  the  procurator  Felix  in  Caesarea.  Here  the 
Apostle  was  confined  two  whole  years  (a.  d.  58,  60),  awaiting  trial 
before  the  Sanhedrin,  occasionally  speaking  before  Felix,  apparent- 
ly treated  with  comparative  mildness,  visited  by  the  Christians,  and 
doubtless  in  some  way  not  recorded,  promoting  the  kingdom  of 
God.^  When  Festus  succeeded  Felix,  Paul,  as  a  Roman  citizen, 
appealed  to  the  tribunal  of  the  Emperor,  and  this  opened  the  way 
to  the  fulfilment  of  his  long  cherished  desire  to  preach  at  Rome. 
Having  once  more  testified  his  innocence,  and  made  a  masterly  de- 
fence before  Festus  and  Agrippa  (King  Herod  Agrippa  II.),  he 
was  sent  in  the  autumn  of  the  year  60  to  the  Emperor.  After  a 
stormy  voyage  and  a  shipwreck,  which  detained  him  and  his  com- 
panions during  the  winter  at  Malta,  he  reached  Rome  in  the  spring 
of  the  following  year.  Here  he  spent  at  least  two  years  in  easy 
confinement,  preaching  the  gospel  to  the  soldiers  who  attended 
him  ;  writing  letters  to  his  distant  Churches  in  Asia  Minor  and 
Greece  (Ephesians,  Colossians,  Philemon,  Philippians),  organiz- 
ing and  directing  the  labors  of  others,  thus  fulfilling  his  Apostolic 
mission  even  in  bonds  and  in  prison. 

5.  The  account  in  the  Book  of  Acts  breaks  off  at  this  point  in 
Paul's  career. 

The  usual  view  of  the  remainder  of  his  life,  supported  by  tradi- 
tion, by  hints  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  and  by  the  statements  of 
the  earliest  church  fathers,  is  somewhat  as  follows :  at  the  end  of 
two  years'  imprisonment,  Paul  was  released,  before  the  persecution 
under  Nero  (a.  d.  64).  He  probably  went  at  once  to  Ephesus, 
where  he  left  Timothy  (1  Tim.  1 :  3),  on  proceeding  to  Macedonia. 
His  next  journey  was  to  Crete,  passing  through  Troas  and  Miletus. 
Titus  was  left  in  Crete,  as  is  inferred  from  the  Epistle  addressed  to 

1  Meyer,  Weiss,  and  others  date  the  Epistles  to  the  Colossians,  Ephesians  and  to 
Philemon  during  this  imprisonment ;  but  without  sufficient  reason. 


INTRODUCTION. 


him.  A  winter,  during  this  interval  of  freedom,  seems  to  have  been 
spent  at  Nicopolis  (Tit.  3  ;  12),  before  which  the  Apostle  had  writ- 
ten the  First  Epistle  to  Timothy,  and  that  to  Titus.  A  journey  to 
Spain,  and  even  to  Britain,  has  been  supposed  to  have  taken  place  ; 
but  of  this  there  are  no  historical  traces.  It  is  generally  held  that 
he  was  re-arrested,  and,  after  writing  the  Second  Epistle  to  Timo- 
thy during  his  second  imprisonment,  was  executed  at  Rome ;  but 
the  date  assigned  varies  from  a.  d.  66  to  68.  Tradition  says  that 
Peter  had  been  brought  to  Rome,  and  that  the  two  Apostles  suf- 
fered martyrdom  on  the  same  day,  adding  a  number  of  legends. 
But  there  is  no  certain  evidence  in  the  New  Testament  that  Peter 
ever  was  at  Rome,  though  it  is  not  impossible,  and  is  made  quite 
probable  by  the  universal  tradition  of  the  second  century  (comp. 
Introd.  to  Romans,  ^1).  Of  the  fact  of  PauVs  martyrdom  at 
Rome,  under  Nero,  there  can  be  little  doubt ;  and  also  that,  being 
a  Roman  citizen,  he  was  put  to  death  by  the  sword.  The  view 
which  denies  a  second  imprisonment  places  the  death  of  Paul  in 
A.  D,  64,  in  connection  with  the  first  persecution  under  Nero,  and 
shortly  after  the  time  at  which  the  Book  of  Acts  closes. 

This  question  of  a  second  imprisonment  cannot,  with  our  present 
insufficient  data,  be  solved  with  mathematical  certainty.  But  on  the 
theory  of  but  one  imprisonment,  it  is-  very  difficult  to  find  a  suitable 
place  for  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  or  to  account  for  certain  historical 
facts  assumed  in  those  writings,  as  well  as  to  understand  their  vale- 
dictory tone  and  general  spirit.  Hence  the  admission  of  the  genu- 
ineness of  these  writings  usually  leads  to  an  acceptance  of  the  the- 
ory of  a  second  imprisonment.  (Comp.  Schaff,  History  of  the 
Christian  Church,  I.  pp.  331-333.)  It  seems  impossible  to  deny 
that  he  was  near  the  close  of  his  earthly  life  of  devotion  to  Christ, 
when  he  penned  the  triumphant  words :  *  I  have  fought  the  good 
fight,  I  have  finished  the  course,  I  have  kept  the  faith :  henceforth 
there  is  laid  up  for  me  the  crown  of  righteousness,  which  the  Lord, 
the  righteous  Judge,  shall  give  me  at  that  day:  and  not  only  to  me, 
but  also  unto  all  them  that  have  loved  his  appearing '  (2  Tim.  4. 
7,8). 

^  2.   Character  of  the  Apostle  Paul. 

Of  the  character  of  the  Apostle  Paul,  we  have  the  fullest  repre- 


INTRODUCTION. 


sentation  in  his  numerous  Epistles  and  the  book  of  the  Acts.  En- 
dowed with  uncommon  depth  and  acuteness  of  thought,  with  great 
energy  and  strong  will,  he  first  appears  at  the  head  of  the  zealots 
for  the  traditions  of  his  fathers,  a  persecutor  of  the  Nazarenes. 
But  cursing  Saul  was  transformed  into  praying  Paul,  the  cruel  per- 
secutor into  the  most  successful  advocate  of  Christianity.  This 
transformation  was  wrought  by  Jesus  himself  appearing  to  him  out 
of  Heaven.  Thus  all  those  gifts  of  nature,  which  were  used  by 
him  as  a  persecutor,  became  gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  were  con- 
secrated to  the  service  of  Christ  crucified.  '  The  same  energy,  de- 
cision, and  consistency,  but  coupled  with  gentleness,  meekness,  and 
wisdom  ;  the  same  inflexibility  of  purpose,  but  no  disposition  to 
use  violence  or  unholy  means :  the  same  independence  and  lordli- 
ness, but  animated  by  the  most  self-denying  love,  which  strives  to 
become  all  things  to  all  men  ;  the  same,  nay,  still  greater  zeal  for 
the  glory  of  God,  but  cleansed  of  all  impure  motives  ;  the  same 
inexorable  rigor,  not,  however,  against  erring  brethren,  but  only 
against  sin  and  all  impeachment  of  the  merits  of  Christ ;  the  same 
fire,  no  longer  that  of  a  passionate  zealot,  but  of  a  mind  at  rest, 
considerate,  and  self-possessed  ;  the  same  dialectic  acumen  of  a 
Rabbin  of  Gamaliel's  school,  no  longer  busied,  however,  with  useless 
subtleties,  but  employed  to  vindicate  evangelical  doctrine  and  op- 
pose all  self-righteousness.'  ^ 

§  3.  Order  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul. 
Thirteen  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  were  certainly  writ- 
ten by  the  Apostle  Paul,  and  the  anonymous  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews 
is  also  ascribed  to  him,  and  is  undoubtedly  Pauline  in  its  thought. 
As  is  well  known,  the  Epistles  of  Paul  have  been  arranged  in 
the  New  Testament  by  another  principle  than  that  of  chronologi- 
cal order;  the  larger  Epistles  to  the  churches  coming  first,  and 
the  Epistles  to  individuals  coming  last.  The  exact  date  of  writing 
in  the  case  of  the  several  Epistles,  and  hence  their  chronological 
order,  is  open  to  great  discussion.  We  place  the  conversion  of 
Paul  in  A.  D.  37.  The  dates  of  the  more  important  events  of  his 
life  would  then  be  as  follows  :  — 

1  Schafif's   History  of  Apostolic  Church,  p.  441. 


INTRODUCTION. 


First  visit  to  Jerusalem 40 

Second  visit  to  Jerusalem 44 

Beginning  of  first  missionary  journey 45 

Council  at  Jerusalem  (third  visit) .50 

Second  missionary  journey  begun 51 

Fourth  visit  to  Jerusalem 54 

Third  missionary  journey  begun 54 

Fifth  and  last  visit  to  Jerusalem  (spring) 58 

Imprisonment  at  Cesarea 58-60 

Voyage  to  Kome  (autumn) 60  61 

First  imprisonment  at  Kome 61-63 

Kelease  and  second  imprisonment  (?) 63-67  (?) 

Martyrdom 64  or  67 

On  the  latter  points,  see  |  i. 

In  conformity  with  this  table,  we  arrange  the  Epistles  into  three 
groups,  — 

1.  Before  the  first  imprisonment  (a.  d.  53-58) :  Thessalonians, 
Galatians,  1  and  2  Corinthians,  Romans. 

2.  During  the  first  imprisonment  (a.  d.  61-64)  :  Colossians, 
Ephesians,  Philemon,  Philippians  ;  probably  Hebrews. 

3.  After  the  first  imprisonment  (uncertain  date,  but  before  67)  : 
Pastoral  Epistles  (2  Timothy  written  last). 

The  points  most  open  to  dispute  are :  the  position  of  Galatians  in 
the  first  group,  of  Philippians  in  the  second,  and  the  date  of 
the  third  group. 

I  4.  Character  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul. 

As  a  whole,  the  Epistles  form  an  inexhaustible  mine  to  the  pro- 
foundest  thought  on  the  highest  themes,  without  a  parallel  in  the 
history  of  epistolary  literature.^  They  exhibit  most  fully  the 
Christian  system  of  truth,  and  reveal  most  plainly  the  inner 
life,  both  of  the  writer  and  of  the  congregations  to  which  they  are 
addressed.  Specially  adapted  to  the  wants  of  these  original  reci- 
pients, they  are  yet  applicable  to  the  Church  in  all  ages  and  coun- 
tries. Strictly  speaking,  they  are  all  pastoral  letters,  containing 
doctrinal  exposition  and  practical  exhortation.  They  begin  with 
apostolic  salutation   and   thanksgiving ;  they   close,  usually,  with 

1 '  When  I  more  narrowly  consider  the  whole  genius  and  character  of  Paul's  style 
I  must  confess  that  T  have  found  no  such  sublimity  of  speaking  in  Plato  liimself 
....  no  exquisiteness  of  vehemence  in  Demosthenes  equal  to  his.' — (Beza.) 


INTRODUCTION. 


personal  intelligence  and  greeting,  along  with  the  benediction. 
Thej  give  the  inner  or  spiritual  history  of  the  Apostolic  age,  while 
the  Book  of  Acts  records  its  outward  history,  each  illustrating  and 
confirming  the  other.^ 

*  It  is  just  this  occasional  character  which  makes  them  so  pecu- 
liarly human.  They  arose  out  of  actual  pressing  needs,  and  they 
are  couched  (most  of  them,  at  least)  in  the  vivid  and  fervent  lan- 
guage of  one  who  takes  a  deep  and  loving  interest  in  the  person  to 
whom  he  is  writing,  as  well  as  in  the  subject  that  he  is  writing 
about.  Precept  and  example,  doctrine  and  practice,  theology  and 
ethics,  are  all  mixed  and  blended  together.  No  religious  books 
present  the  same  variety  as  the  Christian,  and  that  bec£iuse  they 
are  in  the  closest  contact  with  actual  life.'     (Sanday.) 

Taking  up  the  books  in  the  order  followed  in  our  New  Testament, 
we  find  first,  in  place,  size,  and  importance,  the  Epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans (Corinth,  spring,  a.  d.  58).  This  was  addressed  to  a  church 
to  which  Paul  was  a  stranger,  and  seems  adapted  to  prepare  the 
way  for  an  intended  visit.  Its  theme  (chap.  1:  16,  17),  is  the 
gospel  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  believer,  to  the 
Jew  first  and  also  to  the  Greek,  since  it  reveals  a  righteousness 
ftom  God  to  faith.  He  proves  the  universal  need  of  this  salvation, 
and  then  unfolds  the  gospel  itself  as  God's  power,  first  to  justify 
and  then  to  sanctify.  To  this  he  adds  an  outline  of  the  philosophy 
ofthe  history  of  salvation  as  the  revelation  of  an  eternal  plan  to 
manifest  the  divine  certainty  and  calling  of  the  nations,  showing 
alike  the  divine  sovereignty  in  the   calling  of  the  nations,  and  hu° 

1  The  questions  respecting  the  genuineness  of  these  Epistles  cannot  be  fullv 
discussed  here.  Dr.  Baur,  of  Tubingen,  admitted  the  genuinPness  of  foun 
Galatians,  1  and  2  Corinth^-ans,  and  Komans  (except  chaps.  15,  16.).  The  others 
were  written,  he  held,  in  the  second  century,  mainly  for  the  purpose  of  har- 
monizing the  two  opposing  schools  of  Christianity  which  followed  Pef^r  and 
Paul  respectively,  as  representatives  of  Jewish  and  Gentile  tendencies.  This 
theory  leaves  the  most  profound  productions  <  f  early  Christian  literature  without 
any  acknowledged  author,  and  places  them  at  a  time  when  no  one  lived  who  gave 
any  token  that  he  could  have  written  them.  The  further  progress  of  the  libfral 
school  of  criticism  leads  to  more  positive  results.  Hilgenfeld,  for  example,  admits  the 
genuineness  of  seven  ofthe  Pauline  Epistles,  adding  to  thos»  acknowledged  by  Baur, 
1  Thessalonians,  Philippians,  and  Philemon ;  Kenan  accepts  these,  and  Colossians 
also.  Q 


INTRODUCTION. 


man  responsibility  in  accepting  or  rejecting  the  gospel.  The  last 
four  chapters  comprise  exhortations  and  greetings. 

The  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians  (Ephesus,  Macedonia,  a.  d.  57), 
deal  with  the  virtues  and  vices,  the  trials  and  temptations  of  a 
young  congregation  in  the  rich  and  polished  commercial  capital  of 
Ancient  Greece,  whose  idols  were  secular  wisdom  and  sensual 
pleasure.  Here  the  Apostle  contrasts  the  foolish  wisdom  of  the 
gospel  with  the  wise  folly  of  human  philosophy ;  as  in  the  Romans 
he  represents  the  same  gospel  as  a  power  of  God,  which  overpowers, 
at  last,  all  the  power  of  man.  Upon  the  whole,  the  Corinthians  are 
more  ethical  and  pastoral  than  dogmatic :  but  some  of  the  most 
important  doctrinal  discussions  are  interwoven,  as  the  doctrine  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  in  chaps.  10  and  11  of  the  first  Epistle,  and  the 
doctrine  of  the  resurrection  in  chap.  15. 

The  Second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  proceeded  from  profound 
agitation  of  the  mind  and  heart,  and  gives  us  an  insight  into 
the  personal  character  and  experience  of  the  Apostle,  his  trials  and 
joys,  his  severity  and  tenderness,  his  noble  pride  and  deep  humility, 
his  constant  care  and  anxiety  for  the  welfare  of  his  spiritual  chil- 
dren. 

The  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  (Ephesus,  a.  d.  54  to  57,  or  Corinth, 
A.  D.  58)  discusses  the  same  theme  as  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
but  more  tersely,  and  in  direct  opposition  to  the  errors  of  Judaizing 
teachers.  The  council  at  Jerusalem  had  opposed  the  same  error, 
but  the  old  leaven  of  self-righteousness  was  still  at  work,  and  pro- 
duced the  same  legalizing  results.  The  false  teachers  hated  Paul, 
assailed  his  doctrine,  and  questioned  his  apostolic  authority.  The 
Epistle  is  therefore  a  defence  of  his  position  as  an  Apostle  (chaps. 
1  and  2),  of  his  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  (chaps.  3  and  4), 
closing  with  appropriate  exhortations  and  warnings  (chaps.  5  and 
6).  It  remains  the  bulwark  of  evangelical  freedom,  the  armory  of 
positive  Protestantism. 

The  Epistles  to  the  Epheslans,  Philippians,  Colossians,  and  to 
Philemon  were  written  during  the  first  captivity  of  Paul  in  Rome, 
between  61  and  63.  His  faith  turned  his  prison  into  a  temple  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  from  which  he  sent  inspiration  and  comfort  to  his 
distant  brethren  in  the  far  East.  The  Epistles  to  the  Colossians  and 


INTRODUCTION. 


to  the  Ephesians  closely  resemble  each  other  (somewhat  as  do  Ga- 
latians  and  Romans),  and  exhibit  Paul's  doctrine  of  Christ  and  the 
Church.  The  Epistle  to  the  Philippians  contains  likewise  an  ex- 
ceedingly, important  Christological  passage  (2  :  5-10),  but  is  more 
personal,  and  overflows  with  joy,  thanksgiving,  and  brotherly  love. 
It  is  his  midnight  hymn  in  the  dungeon  at  Philippi,  where  he 
founded  one  of  his  most  flourishing  and  affectionate  congregations. 

The  two  Epistles  to  the  Thessalonians  are  the  earliest,  dating 
from  53  and  54,  shortly  after  the  organization  of  a  church  at  Thes- 
salonica,  a  commercial  city  in  Macedonia.  They  correct  certain 
misapprehensions  respecting  the  second  coming  of  Christ  and  the 
great  apostasy  that  must  precede  it,  and  contain  suitable  exhorta- 
tions to  a  sober,  diligent,  and  watchful  life. 

The  three  Pastoral  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  to  Titus  contain  the 
last  counsels  and  directions  of  the  Apostle.  They  refer  chiefly  to 
church  organization  and  administration,  and  the  pastoral  care  of 
individual  members.  The  Second  Epistle  to  Timothy,  written  from 
the  prison  in  Rome,  in  fall  view  of  his  approaching  martyrdom,  is 
his  swan-song.  He  expects  the  speedy  close  (of  his  good  fight  of 
faith,  and  the  unfading  crown  of  righteousness  awaiting  him  in  the 
kingdom  of  glory. 

The  short  Epistle  to  Philemon  exhibits  him  as  a  perfect  gentle- 
man in  his  social  and  personal  relations.  It  is  important  for  the 
question  of  slavery  and  the  Apostolic  remedy. 

The  anonymous  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  probably  written  by 
a  pupil  of  the  Apostle  (2:  3),  under  the  influence  of  the  genius  of 
Paul,  perhaps  with  his  direct  cooperation,  apparently  between  62 
and  64,  from  some  town  in  Italy  (13:  23,  24),  to  the  Christians  of 
Hebrew  descert  in  the  East.  It  warns  them  against  the  danger  of 
apostasy,  and  shows  the  immeasurable  superiority  of  Christ  over 
Moses,  and  of  the  Gospel  dispensation  over  the  dispensation  of  the 
Law.  The  latter  was  a  significant  type  and  prophecy  of  the  for- 
mer, the  mysterious  fleeting  shadow  of  the  abiding  substance. 
Here  we  find  the  best  exposition  of  the  eternal  priesthood  and  all 
sufficient  sacrifice  of  Christ.  The  doctrinal  discussions  are  inter- 
woven with  the  richest  exhortations  and  consolations,  fresh  from  the 
fountain  of  a  genuine  inspiration.     Tradition  and  conjecture  are 


INTRODUCTION. 


divided  with  reference  to  the  author  between  Paul,  Luke,  Barnabas, 
and  ApoUos.  It  is  certain  from  internal  evidence  that  it  is  full  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  speaks  with  divine  authority.  Like  the  mys- 
terious Melchizedek  of  the  seventh  chapter,  it  bears  itself  with 
priestly  and  kingly  dignity,  and  has  the  power  of  an  endless  life. 

The  Epistles  may  be  briefly  characterized  as  follows :  — 

Romans:  doctrinal  (soteriologicalj. 

1  and  2  Corinthians  :  personal  and  pastoral  (practically  pole- 
mical). 

Galatians  :  personal  and  doctrinally  polemic  (soteriological). 

Ephesians  :  doctrinal  (Christological  and  ecclesiological). 

Philippians  :  pastoral  and  personal. 

Colossians  :  doctrinal  (Christological,  with  polemical  parts). 

1  and  2  Thessalonians  :  pastoral  and  doctrinal  (eschatological). 

1  and  2  Timothy  and  Titus :  personal  and  pastoral, 

Philemon:  personal. 

The  value  of  the  Epistles  of  Paul  as  evidence  of  the  truth  of 
the  great  factg  of  Christianity,  can  scarcely  be  overestimated.  The 
theories  which  make  our  four  Gospels  compilations  of  the  second 
century,  with  only  a  small  basis  of  historic  truth,  are  proven  as- 
sumptions by  the  phenomena  of  Paul's  writings.  From  those  Epis- 
tles, the  genuineness  of  which  none  have  doubted,  it  can  be  shown 
that  this  Apostle  accepted  and  believed  the  great  facts  which  reveal 
the  Christ  of  historical  Christianity.  If  any  son  of  Adam  has  ever 
trusted  in  a  crucified  and  risen  Saviour,  that  man  was  Paul.  'Who 
can  avoid  the  conclusion  that  such  ought  also  to  be  our  faith? 
Or  shall  we  say  that  Paul  was  deceived  ?  But  who  that 
observes  his  vigorous  intellect,  his  acuteness  of  reasoning  and, 
above  all,  his  sound  practical  judgment,  can,  for  a  moment? 
suppose  that  such  a  man  could,  for  the  last  thirty  years  of  his  life 
have  been  under  a  delusion?  Or  shall  we  impute  to  him,  that, 
knowing  Christianity  to  be  a  fable,  he  practised  upon  the  credulity 
of  mankind  to  further  his  own  views  ?  But  what  could  have  been 
his  inducement?  Could  wealth  or  honor?  When  he  became  a 
convert  he  sacrificed  both  for  penury  and  disgrace  I  Did  he  seek, 
under  cover  of  a  lie,  to  promote  the  good  of  mankind?  But  who, 
in  his   senses,  would  build  on  so  rotten  a  foundation  ?     For,  how- 


INTRODUCTION. 


ever  cunningly  devised,  the  imposture  must,  sooner  or  later,  be  de- 
tected 1  Besides,  it  is  impossible  for  any  one  to  read  Paul's  letters 
without  feeling  that  he,  at  least,  was  an  honest  man.  The  only  al- 
ternative is,  that  Paul  had  a  rational  and  deep-rooted  conviction  of 
the  truth  of  Christianity,  and  that  what  he  preached  to  others  he 
believed  himself.'  ^ 

1  Lewin,  Life  and  Epiilles  of  St.  Paul,  ii.  4^. 


II.    SPECIAL  lETRODUCTIOE" 

TO    THE 

EPISTLE  TO   THE  ROMANS. 

§  1.  The  Congregation  at  Rome.  §  2.  Occasion  and  Purpose 
OF  THE  Epistle.  §  3.  Theme  and  Contents,  g  4.  Time  and 
Place  of  Composition.  ^  5.  Genuineness  and  Integrity. 
^  6.  Characteristics. 

I  1.  Tlie  Congregation  at  Rome. 
The  origin  of  the  congregation  of  Christians  at  Rome  is  a  matter 
of  inference  and  conjecture.  That  such  a  congregation  existed  at 
the  time  Paul  wrote,  is  of  course  undoubted,  and  taken  for  granted 
in  the  Book  of  the  Acts  (chap.  27 :  15).  An  altogether  untrust- 
worthy tradition  dates  the  first  preaching  during  the  life  of  our 
Lord.  Some  Jews  from  Rome  may  have  been  converted  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost  (Acts  2:  lOj,  and  on  their  return  formed  the  nu- 
cleus of  a  Jewish  Christian  Congregation ;  but  more  than  this 
cannot  be  safely  affirmed.  The  Roman  ecclesiastical  tradition 
which  claims  that  the  Apostle  Peter  was  the  founder  of  the  Roman 
Church,  is  without  any  positive  historical  support.  It  cannot  be 
proven  that  the  Apostle  Peter  was  in  Rome  before  A.  d.  63 ;  even 
the  universal  testimony  of  tradition,  that  he  there  labored  after  that 
time  and  suffered  martyrdom  under  Nero,  has  been  repeatedly  dis- 
puted by  modern  scholars.  (Comp.  Schaff,  Histoid  of  Christian 
'Church,  §  36.)  The  statement  of  Eusebius,  which  tells  of  his  re- 
moval there  in  a.  d.  42,  and  of  a  twenty-five  years'  subsequent  resi- 
dence, is  contrary  to  Acts  15,  Gal.  2 :  11.  Furthermore,  Paul 
would  probably  not  have  written  to  the  Christians  at  Rome,  if 
another  Apostle  had  founded  the  congregation  (comp.  Acts  19  :  21; 
Rom.  15 :  20  ;  2  Cor.  10  :  16).     Nor  do  we  find  any  traces  of  Peter's 


INTRODUCTION. 


labors  there  in  the  Book  of  the  Acts.  *  ^"e  may  add  that  our 
Epistle  —  since  Peter  cannot  have  labored  in  Rome  before  it  was 
written  —  is  a  fact  destructive  of  the  historical  basis  of  the  Pa- 
pacy ;  in  so  far  as  the  latter  is  made  to  rest  on  the  founding  of  the 
Koman  Church  and  ihe  exercise  of  its  episcopate  by  that  Apostle. 
For  Paul,  the  writing  of  such  a  didactic  Epistle  to  a  church  of 
which  he  knew  Peter  to  be  the  founder  and  bishop,  would  have 
been,  according  to  the  principle  of  his  apostolic  independence,  an 
impossible  inconsistency '  (Meyer). 

It  is,  however,  quite  evident  that  the  congregation  had  been 
founded  some  years  before  a.  d.  58,  when  our  Epistle  was  written. 
The  Apostle  had  desired  to  visit  the  Christians  there  for  many  years 
(chap.  15  :  23  ;  comp.  chap.  1 :  13),  and  refers  to  those  among  them 
who  had  been  converted  before  himself  (chap.  16:  7).  The  wide- 
spread fame  of  the  church  (chap.  i.  8),  and  its  different  places  of 
assembly  (chap.  16  :  5, 14,  15),  confirm  this  view.  Rome  being  the 
centre  of  all  travel,  full  of  foreigners  from  every  part  of  the  Em- 
pire, and  with  a  large  number  of  Jewish  residents  (comp.  also  Acts 
28  :  17  ff.),  the  gospel  might  have  been  carried  thither  earlier  than 
to  Asia  Minor,  or  Greece.  If  the  edict  of  Claudius  (a.  d.  51),  ban- 
ishing the  Jews  from  the  city  (comp.  Acts  18  :  2),  was  occasioned 
by  controversies  excited  by  the  introduction  of  Christianity ,i  then 
a  very  early  origin  must  be  admitted.  Still '  we  may  suppose  that 
the  gospel  was  preached  there  in  a  confused  and  imperfect  form, 
scarcely  more  than  a  phase  of  Judaism,  as  in  the  case  of  ApoUos 
at  Corinth  (Acts  18:  25),  or  the  disciples  at  Ephesus  (Acts  19: 
1-3).'  Lightfoot.  Even  if  there  was  no  organized  Christian  com- 
munity at  the  time  of  the  edict  of  Claudius,  the  banishment  of  the 
Jews,  followed  by  their  speedy  return,  is  closely  connected  with  the 

1  Suetonius  says  that  Claudius  banished  the  Jews  because  they  kept  up  a  tumult  at 
the  instigation  of  Girestus  {impulsore  Chresto).  This  '  Chrestus '  '  may  have  been  a  sedi- 
tious Jew  then  living:,  one  of  those  political  false  prophets,  who  abounded  in  Pales- 
tine before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  But  as  no  such  person  is  otherwise  known  to 
us,  and  as  it  is  a  fact  that  the  Romans  often  used  Chrestus  for  Christus,  it  is  more  than 
probable  that  the  same  mistake  is  made  also  in  this  edict;  and  the  popular  tumults 
must,  accordingly,  be  referred  to  the  controversies  between  the  Jews  and  Christians! 
who  were  at  that  time,  in  the  view  of  the  heathen,  not  very  distinct  from  one  another 
(Schaff,  Hist.  Christian  Church,  %  37).  Comp.  Lange,  Romans,  p.  31,  where  the  au- 
thorities and  arguments  on  both  sides  are  given. 


INTRODUCTION. 


growth  of  the  Roman  congregation,  as  it  existed  when  Paul  wrote. 
'Fugitives  from  neighboring  Greece  became  Christians  and  disci- 
ples of  Paul ;  and  after  their  return  to  Rome  were  heralds  of 
Christianity,  and  took  part  in  organizing  a  congregation.  This  is 
historically  proved  by  the  example  of  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  who, 
when  Jews,  emigrated  to  Corinth,  lived  there  over  a  year  and  a 
half,  in  the  company  of  Paul,  and  subsequently  appeared  as  teach- 
ers in  Rome  and  occupants  of  a  house  where  the  Roman  congrega- 
tion assembled  (Rom.  16:3).  Probably  other  individuals  men- 
tioned in  chap.  16  were  led  by  God  in  a  similar  way;  but  it  is  cer- 
tain that  Aquila  and  Priscilla  occupied  a  most  important  position 
among  the  founders  of  the  congregation ;  for  among  the  many 
teachers  whom  Paul  salutes  in  chap  16  he  presents  his  first  greet- 
ing to  them,  and  this,  too,  with  such  flattering  commendation  as  he 
bestows  upon  none  of  the  rest'  (Meyer).  This  would  hold  equally 
good  if,  as  is  not  unlikely,  Aquila  and  his  wife  had  become  believ- 
ers before  the  banishment  from  Rome.  If  Gentiles  had  been  con- 
verted in  that  city,  the  edict  would  not  have  affected  them  ;  while 
the  returning  Jews  who  had  felt  Paul's  influence  would  be  all  the 
more  ready  to  fraternize  closely  with  them  rather  than  with  their 
unbelieving  countrymen.  This  natural  result  accounts  for  the  tone 
used  by  the  leading  Jews  in  their  interview  with  Paul  at  Rome 
(Acts  28:  21,  22). 

This  introduces  the  much  discussed  question,  whether  the  Ro- 
man Christians  were  mainly  of  Jewish  or  Gentile  extraction.  (See 
^  2,  on  the  relation  of  this  question  to  the  purpose  of  the  Epistle.) 
We  have  already  indicated  the  presence  of  a  numerous  Jewish  ele- 
ment, and  the  Epistle  itself  po'.nts  to  the  same  fact  (see  on  chaps. 
4:  1,  12  ;  7:  1-6  ;  14:  1  flf.;  15  :  8).  The  traces  of  Judaizing  in- 
fluences are,  however,  very  slight,  although  the  letters  written  dur- 
ing Paul's  imprisonment  show  that  these  adverse  tendencies  were 
present  at  the  later  period.  Christianity  at  Rome  was  therefore 
Pauline  in  its  type  when  Paul  wrote  this  Epistle.  The  theory  of 
Dr.  Baur,  that  the  Church  was  not  only  Jewish  but  Judaistic  and 
anti-Pauline,  is  altogether  unwarranted.  It  seems  most  probable 
that  the  great  majority  of  the  congregation  was  composed  of  be- 
lievers of  Gentile  origin.     Rome  was  the  centre  of  the  Gentile 


INTRODUCTIOX. 


world,  and  maintained  constant  intercourse  with  those  places  where 
Paul's  success  among  the  Gentiles  had  been  most  marked  {e.  g., 
Antioch,  Ephesus,  Corinth).  The  Epistle  itself  gives  indications 
of  his  preponderance;  see  on  chaps.  1 :  5-7,  13;  11 :  13,  25,  28; 
14:  1;  15:  15,  16;  in  the  last  passage  he  grounds  his  right  to 
instruct  and  strengthen  the  Roman  Christians  upon  his  call  to  be 
the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles.  The  fact  that  the  Epistle  was  written 
in  Greek  sheds  little  light  upon  the  question  before  us,  since  the 
Jews  visited  Rome  would  all  speak  that  language.^  But  it  seems 
probable  that  the  Gentile  Christians  were  mainly  from  the  Greek 
population  of  Rome,  which,  pure  and  mixed,  formed  a  large  and 
important  fraction  of  the  whole.  The  names  in  chap.  16  are  mainly- 
Greek,''  only  a  few  are  Latin.  From  this  list  of  names  Bishop 
Lightfoot  makes  the  following  inference  as  to  the  rank  and  station 
of  the  believers :  '  Among  the  less  wealthy  merchants  and  trades- 
men, among  the  petty  officers  of  the  army,  among  the  slaves  and 
freedmen  of  the  imperial  palace — whether  Jews  or  Greeks — the 
gospel  would  first  find  a  firm  footing.  To  this  last  class  allusion 
is  made  in  Phil.  4:  22:  "they  that  are  of  Caesar's  household." 
From  these  it  would  gradually  work  upwards  and  downwards ;  but 
we  may  be  sure  that  in  respect  of  rank  the  Church  of  Rome  was  no 
exception  to  the  general,  that  "  not  many  wise,  not  many  mighty, 
not  many  noble"  were  called  (1  Cor.  1 :  20).' 

The  subsequent  history  of  the  Roman  Church  does  not  fall  within 
the  limits  of  this  Introduction,  but  this  sketch  of  its  beginnings 
may  well  be  closed  by  these  words  of  Dr.  Lange :  '  As  the  light 
and  darkness  of  Judaism  was  centralized  in  Jerusalem,  the  theo- 
cratic city  of  God  (the  holy  city,  the  murderer  of  the  prophets),  so 
was  heathen  Rome,  the  humanitarian  metropolis  of  the  world,  the 
centre  of  all  the  elements  of  light  and  darkness  prevalent  in  the 
heathen  world ;  and  so  did  Christian  Rome  become  the  centre  of 

^  On  tlie  general  use  of  the  Greek  language  at  that  period,  see  Dr.  Alexander 
Roberts,  Discission  on  the  GosjJels ;  Smith,  Bible  Dictionary,  Amer.  ed.,  Language  of  the 
New  Testament,  by  Professor  Hadley ;  compare  also  the  first  part  of  Schaff's  Compar^ 
ion  to  the  Greek  Testament. 

2  See  g  5,  where  the  questions  respecting  that  chapter  are  discussod,  and  the  Excur. 
BUS  on  pp.  255,  256.  If  it  was  not  addressed  to  Rome,  then,  of  course,  no  inference 
can  be  drawn  from  it  in  regard  to  that  congregation. 


INTRODUCTION. 


vital  light,  and  of  all  the  antichristian  darkness  in  the  Christian 
Church.  Hence,  Rome,  like  Jerusalem,  not  only  possesses  a 
unique  historical  significance,  but  is  a  universal  form  operative 
through  all  ages.'     See  Lange,  Romans,  pp.  29,  30. 

^  2.  Occasion  and  Purpose  of  the  Epistle. 

The  occasion  was  the  non-fulfilment  of  the  Apostle's  desire  to 
preach  at  Rome  (chap.  1:  9-15).  He  takes  the  opportunity, 
afforded  by  the  departure  of  Phoebe  from  Corinth  (comp.  I  4).  to 
write  to  the  Roman  congregation ;  both  to  give  in  writing  what  he- 
would  have  announced  to  them  orally,  and  to  pave  the  way  for  those 
personal  labors  he  hoped  to  put  forth  among  them  in  the  future 
(chap.  15:  22-32).  There  hag  been  much  discussion  as  to  the 
purpose,  involving  a  variety  of  opinions  as  to  the  occasion.  Some 
writers  insist  that  the  Apostle  purposed  to  make  a  formal  doctrinal 
treatise  on  soteriology  (or,  justification  by  faith) ;  that  he  prepared 
it  for  Rome,  because  of  the  importance  of  the  city.  This  view, 
while  partially  true,  lessens  the  personal  and  historical  character  of 
thePpistle.^  On  the  other  hand,  many  commentators  and  critics, 
especially  in  Germany,  have  attributed  to  the  Apostle  a  motive, 
too  exclusively  polemical,  seeking  the  occasion  for  the  Epistle  in 
the  state  of  things  among  the  Christians  at  Rome,  assuming  pecu- 
liar conflicts  between  the  Jewish  and  Gentile  elements,  of  which 
the  Epistle  itself,  rightly  interpreted,  and  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
show  no  trace.^     Such  antagonisms  may  have  appeared,  and  the 

1 '  When  Paul  had  been  last  at  Corinth,  not  only  Aquila  and  Priscilla,  but  a  vast 
number  of  other  Jews,  on  their  expulsion  from  the  capital  by  the  decree  of  Claudius, 
had  either  passed  through  Corinth  on  their  way  to  Judea  or  other  countries,  or,  like 
Aquila  and  Priscilla,  had  taken  up  a  temporary  abode  there.  Paul  had  thus  the  op- 
portunity (of  which  he  availed  himself)  of  securing  the  friendship  of  many  fellow- 
countrymen,  and  it  is  not  a  little  remarkable  that  at  the  close  of  the  Epistle  he 
salutes  two  households,  and  no  less  than  twenty-six  different  individuals,  and  gene- 
rally with  some  discriminating  touch  of  character,  so  that  evidently  the  Apostle  was 
not  paying  a  cold  compliment,  but  was  familiar  with  their  personal  and  private 
history.'— Lewin's  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul  2  :  p.  41. 

9  Dr.  Baur,  at  first,  claimed  that  the  Christians  at  Eome  were  mainly  Jewish,  and 
hostile  to  Paul;  hence  that  chaps.  9-11  constitute  the  doctrinal  essence  of  the  Epis- 
tle. This  view  he  afterwards  Modified,  though  still  upliolding  the  polf-mic  (or  per- 
sonal apologetic)  character  of  the  letter.  Schott,  on  the  other  hand,  makes  the 
Epistle  an  apology  for  the  Gentile  apostolate  of  Paul  before  Gentile  Christians  of  the 


INTRODUCTION.  xxvu 


Apostle  may  have  known  of  them  ;  but  that  they  occasioned  the 
Epistle,  or  largely  modified  its  plan,  seems  very  unlikely. 

On  the  occasion  above  noted,  the  Apostle  wrote  to  this  cosmo- 
politan congregation  of  believers.  In  Rome,  if  anywhere,  those 
evangelical  principles  which  were  of  universal  application  would 
need  the  greatest  emphasis.  And  the  antithesis  between  law  and 
gospel,  as  it  then  existed,  far  from  being  solely  between  Jewish  and 
Gentile  Christians,  was  the  expression  of  a  world-historical  con- 
trast and  contest  (of  which  the  city  of  Rome  itself  still  remains  a 
witness).  As  the  Apostle  had  not  founded  the  church,  he  felt  him- 
selt  less  influenced  by  special  purposes  than  in  wi'iting  to  the  Chris- 
tians of  Asia  Minor  and  Greece ;  hence  he  not  only  omits  all  the 
polemical  references  which  abound  in  the  similar  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians,  but  gives  a  much  fuller  doctrinal  statement.  His  theme 
(chap.  1:  16,  17)  is  wide  enough  to  touch  every  possible  case  among 
the  recipients  (including  the  dark  problem  of  Jewish  unbelief), 
and  this  leads  him  to  an  ethical  conclusion  (chap.  12:  1),  tliat  has 
application  to  any  special  cases  he  may  have  in  mind.  The  various 
views  respecting  the  analysis  ot  the  Epistle  are,  of  course,  affected 
by  the  theories  held  regarding  the  purpose. 

^  3.  Theme  and  Contents. 
As  already  indicated  (Gen.  Tntrod.  §  4,  p.  xvii.),  the  theme  of  the 
Epistle  is  to  be  found  in  chap.  1 :  16,  17  :  The  gospel  '  is  the  power 
of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that  believeth,  to  the  Jew  first, 
and  also  to  the  Greek.'  The  reason  it  is  such  a  power  is  that 
'  therein  is  revealed  a  righteousness  of  God  (coming  from  Him) 
from  faith  unto  faith,'  in  accordance  with  the  Old  Testament  declara- 
tion, '  The  righteous  shall  live  by  faith.'  Strictly  speaking,  the  main 
fheme  is  not  justification  by  faith,  ^  as  is  usually  held  by  those  who 

Pauline  school ;  as  if  these  required  any  such  apology.  A  subordinate  apologetic 
aim  may  be  admitted,  espei  ia'ly  to  account  for  chaps.  9-11 ;  but  even  here  the  Apos- 
tle has  in  mind,  not  so  much  his  apostolate  to  the  Gentiles,  as  the  entire  problom  re- 
specting the  relation  of  God's  ancient  people  to  the  newly  engrafted  Gentile  world. 
This  expanation  of  (Jod's  plan  of  wisdom  and  mercy  would  be  especially  needed  by 
Christians  of  Gentile  origin. 

1  Compare  Dr.  Shedd:  The  doctrine  of  gratuitous  justifica  ion  —  chapters  1-11 : 
Necessity  (chaps.  1-3 :  20),  nature  (chaps.  3  :  21-4 :  25),  effects  (chaps.  5-8),  and  appli- 
cation (chaps.  9-n)  of  gratuitous  justification. 


INTRODUCTION. 


lliink  thai  the  Apostle  had  a  purely  didactic  purpose  in  writing  the 
'E])\st]Q,'but  salvation  hy  God's  power  through  faith,  not  through  the 
law.  This  salvation  is  wrought  by  means  of  a  righteousness  which 
comes  from  God  to  the  believer ;  the  first  essential  step  is  God's 
giving  (imputing)  this  righteousness  to  believing  sinners,  so  that 
they  are  accounted  righteous  by  Him  ;  but  He  makes  them  right- 
eous by  the  same  plan  and  power.  The  two  are  inseparable,  and 
both  are  treated  of  in  this  Epistle  as  constituting  God"s  power  unto 
salvation.  After  the  full  discussion  of  this  doctrinal  theme  (chaps. 
1-11),  the  Apostle  passes  to  exhortations  and  ethical  applications 
(chaps.  12-16),  w^hich  are  but  expansions  of  the  leading  practical 
inference  (chap.  12  :  1) ;  'I  beseech  you  therefore,  brethren,  by  the 
mercies  of  God,  that  ye  present  your  bodies  a  living  sacrifice,  holy, 
acceptable  unto  God,  which  is  your  reasonable  service.' 


r- 


CONTEXTS. 

Greeting  and  Introduction,  chap.   1  :  1-15.     Theme  (salvation  free 
and  universal),  chap.  1:  16,  17. 

I.  Doctrinal  part :    The  gospel,  for  every  one  that  believeth,  is 

the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  ;  to  the  Jew  first  and  also 
to  the  Greek  ;  chaps.  1  :  18-11. 

II.  Practical  part :  Therefore  offer  your  bodies  to  God,  a  living 

sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  for  this  salvation;    chaps.  12-16. 
I.   Doctrinal  part;  chaps.  1  :  18-11  :  36.^ 

1.  Every  one  needs  this  power  of  God  unto  salvation,  for  all  are 
sin7iers;  1:18-3:20;  Gentiles  (chap.  1:18-32),  and  Jews 
(chaps.  2-3  :  20). 

2.  This  power  of  God  is  to  every  one  that  helieveth ;  chaps.  3: 
21-4  :  25.  The  plan  is  one  of  faith  (chap.  3  :  21-26).  God 
is  the  God  of  the  Gentiles  as  well  as  of  the  Jews  (chap.  3:27- 
31),  and  Abraham  was  justified  by  faith,  being  the  father  of 

1  Professor  Godet,  in  substantial  agreement  with  many  others,  divides  the  doctrinal 
part  as  follows :  — 

Ftindamenktl part:  1  :  18-5:  21. 

The  righteousness  of  faith  without  legal  works. 
I\rst  Complementary  part:  6-8. 

Sanctification  without  the  law. 
Second  complementary  part :  9-11. 
The  rejection  of  Israel. 


INTRODUCTION. 


believers,  uncircumcised  as  well  as  circumcised  ( chap.  4 :  1- 
25). 

3.  Thus  God  actually  saves  men ;  chaps.  5-8. 

[a.)  Reconciliation  the  result  of  justification  (chap.  C  .  1-11.) 
(6.)  Righteousness  and  life,  through   and  in   Christ,  overbear 
the  parallel,  yet  contrasted,  case  of  sin  and  death  through 
Adam  (chap;5:  12-21. 
(c.)  This  method  of  free  salvation  does  not  lead  to  sin,  but  to 
holiness  (chaps.  G-8.) 
i.  Grace  does  not  lead  to  sin  (chap.  6)  ; 
ii.  the  law  is  in  itself  just  and  good,  but  powerless  to  sanc- 
tify (chap.  7 ) ; 
iii.  the  work  of  the  Spirit  over  against  the  failure  of  the  law 
(chap.  8) ;  nothing  can  separate  from  the  love  of  Christ! 

4.  The  universality  of  this  salvation  :  This  gospel  is  to  the  Jew 
Jirsf,  and  also  to  ihe  Gentile  :  it  has  apparently  failed   to  save 

the  Jew,  but  only  apparently  (chaps.  9-11). 
(a.)    GocVs  sovereignty :  God's  promise  is  not  void  (chap.  9  : 

1-29). 
{b.)  Man's  responsibility:    The  Jews  are  excluded  by  their 

own  unbelief  (chaps.  9:  30-10  :  21). 
(c.)  The  prospective  solution:  God  has  not  cast  oflPHis  people, 

but  overruled  their  unbelief  for  the  salvation  of  the  Gentiles, 

after  which  Israel  shall  be  saved  (chap.  11 :  1-32). 
[d.)  Doxology  in  view  of  this  mystery  (chap.  11  :  33-36). 
II.  Practical  part  (chaps.  12-16) :    Man's  gratitude  for  the  free 
salvation. 

1.  General  exhortations  (chaps.  12:  1-21;  13:  8-14). 

2.  Special  discussions  : 

(a.)  In  regard  to  obedience  to  rulers  (chap.  13  :  1-7.) 
(6.)  In  regard  to   scruples  about  eating  meat  and  drinking 
wine,  etc.  (chaps.  14  :  1-15  :  13). 

3.  Conclusion  (chaps.  15:  14-16:  27). 

(a.)  Personal  explanations,  as  at  the  beginning  (chap.   15: 

14-33). 
(6.)  Messages  and  greetings  to  various  persons   (chap.   16  : 

l-lGj. 


INTRODUCTION. 


(c.)  Closing  warnings,    with  greetings    from  various   persons 

(chap.  16  :  17-2i). 
{d.)  Concluding  Doxology  (chap.  16 :  25-27). 

§  4.     Time  and  Place  of  Composition. 

There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  generally  received  opinion  that 
this  Epistle  was  written  from  Corinth,  during  the  three  months' 
stay  in  Achaia  (Greece),  mentioned  in  Acts  20:  3.  For,  according 
to  chap.  15  :  25,  etc.,  at  the  time  of  writing  the  Apostle  was  about  to 
go  to  Jerusalem  with  the  offering  for  the  poor,  made  by  the 
churches  of  Macedonia  and  Achaia..  At  Corinth  he  had  directed 
collections  to  be  made ;  it  was  the  largest  city  of  Achaia ;  Phoebe, 
who  took  the  letter,  was  from  Cenchreae,  the  sea-port  of  Corinth 
(chap.  16 :  1,  2)  ;  Gaius  (chap.  16  :  23),  his  host,  was  probably  a 
Corinthian  (1  Cor.  1:  14).  Meyer  suggests  that  the  letter  was 
written  before  the  plot  of  the  Jews  (Acts  20:  3),  which  changed 
the  route  of  the  Apostle.  According  to  our  view  of  the  chronology, 
the  date  would  be  early  in  a.  d.  58,  since  the  departure  for  Jeru- 
salem was  made  in  due  season  to  reach  that  city  before  Pentecost 
(Acts  20 :  16). 

^  5.   Genuineness  and  Integrity  of  the  Epistle. 

^  The  "Epistle  was  written  by  the  Apostle  Paul.  The  testimony  of 
the  ancient  Church  is  unanimous ;  the  internal  evidence  is  equally 
strong,  and  few  of  the  most  destructive  critics  have  ventured  to  as- 
sail its  genuineness.  From  the  very  first,  it  was  quoted  by  Chris- 
tian writers,  and  even  Marcion  acknowledged  it. 

But  its  integrity  has  been  opposed  frequently,  and  in  various 
ways,  the  chief  doubt  being  respecting  chaps.  15,  16.  They  were 
rejected  by  Marcion  on  doctrinal  grounds,  and  in  modern  times  by 
Baur.  Others  admit  that  Paul  wrote  them,  but  not  as  a  part  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans.  The  main  grounds  for  this  position 
are  the  insertion  of  the  concluding  doxology  (in  some  MSS.)  at  the 
close  of  chap.  14,  and  the  long  list  of  acquaintances  at  Rome,  where 
Paul  had  not  yet  been,  none  of  them  named  in  the  Epistles  from 
Rome.  Neither  of  these  reasons  are  of  great  weight,  while  the 
theories  that  seek  to  accouni   or  the  appending  of  the  final  chapters 


INTRODUCTION. 


are  unsustained  by  any  historical  fact.^  (See  Excursus  at  the  close 
of  chap.  16).  It  may  be  added  that  the  Greek  text  of  this  Epistle 
is  remarkably  free  from  important  variations ;  even  the  very  diffi- 
cult critical  question  in  chap.  5 :  1,  involves  no  point  of  doctrine. 
The  most  weighty  passages  have  been  preserved  with  wonderful 
accuracy. 

§  6.    Characteristics  of  the  Epistle. 

The  Epistle  is  the  bulwark  of  the  doctrines  of  sin  and  grace,  the 
Magna  Charta  of  the  evangelical  system  against  all  Judaizing  and 
Romanizing  perversions.  Luther  calls  it  Hhe  chief  part  of  the 
New  Testament,  and  the  perfect  gospel ; '  Coleridge :  '  the  most 
profound  work  in  existence ; '  Meyer :  '  the  grandest,  boldest,  most 
complete  composition  of  Paul.'  Godet  terms  it  '  the  cathedral  of 
the  Christian  faith.'  Owing  to  the  character  of  the  subject  treated, 
it  is  full  of  difficulties ;  almost  every  chapter  is  a  theological  battle- 
field ;  but  the  leading  truths  are  clear  enough  to  those  whose  hearts 
are  not  crusted  over  by  the  legalism  the  Apostle  so  vigorously  as- 
sails. This  Epistle  and  that  to  the  Galatians  discuss  the  same 
fundamental  doctrine,  namely,  justification  by  free  grace  through 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  with  whom  the  believer  enters  into  personal 
life-union.  They  diflPer,  however:  the  latter  is  a  personal  defence, 
directly  opposing  the  false  teachers  of  legalism  who  were  perverting 
a  church  founded  by  the  Apostle  himself;  the   former,  written  to 

1  Bishop  Lightfoot  (in  Smith's  Bib.  Diet.)  advocates  the  view  '  that  the  letter  was 
circulated  at  an  early  date  (whether  during  the  Apostle's  lifetime  or  not  it  is  idle  to 
inquire)  in  TWO  forms,  both  with  and  without  the  two  last  chapters.'  This  view 
he  afterwards  modifies:  'At  some  later  period  of  his  life  ....  it  occurred  to  the 
Apostle  to  give  this  letter  a  wider  circulation.  To  this  end  he  made  two  changes  in  it . 
he  obliterated  all  mention  of  Kome  in  the  opening  paragraphs  by  slight  alterations  ; 
and  he  cut  off  the  two  last  chapters  containing  personal  matters,  adding  at  the  same 
time  a  doxology,  a  termination  to  the  whole.'  See  Professor  Abbot's  supplementary 
article  (Romans)  in  Smith's  Bih.  Did.  On  the  other  hand,  Canon  Farrar  {St.  Paid, 
ii.  pp.  170, 171)  advocates  the  view  '  that  chap.  16,  in  whole  or  in  part,  was  addressed 
to  Ephesus  as  a  personal  termination  to  the  copy  of  the  Roman  Epistle,  which  could 
hardly  fail  to  be  sent  to  so  important  a  church.'  This  is  substantially  the  view  of 
Renan,  who  thinks  that  our  Epistle  in  chaps.  15,  IG,  is  a  collection  of  all  the  dif- 
ferent conclusions  addressed  to  the  various  churclies  that  first  received  the  encycli. 
cal  letter.  Weiss  favors  the  view  that  chap.  16:  1-20  was  a  letter  of  recommenda- 
tion for  Phoebe,  addressed  to  Ephesua,  and  afterwards  incorporated  into  the  Epistle 
to  Rome,  of  which  she  was  the  bearer. 


INTRODUCTION. 


strangers,  opposes  the  corrupt  (and  legalistic)  tendencies  of  the 
human  heart,  by  a  fuller  statement  of  God's  power  unto  salvation. 
They  supplement  each  other,  and  together  furnish  the  immovable 
Scriptural  basis  for  evangelical  freedom  in  Christ,  the  best  defence 
against  the  perversions  of  doctrine  which  have  been  sustained  by 
the  most  rigid  ecclesiasticism.  Nor  should  it  escape  notice  that 
these  Epistles  were  addressed,  in  the  one  instance  to  Rome,  and  in 
the  other  to  people  of  Keltic  race  (comp.  Introduction  to  Galatians), 
the  city  and  race  at  present  most  completely  under  the  bondage  of 
organized  legalism.  Moreover,  as  Godet  admirably  sets  forth,  the 
Epistle  sheds  light  upon  many  other  topics  which  are  of  permanent 
interest  to  thoughtful  men. 

As  regards  style,  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  is  characterized  by 
strength,  fulness,  and  warmth'  (Tholuck),  the  latter  qualities 
overbearing  at  times  the  perspicuity  which  we  would  expect  from 
so  powerful  a  writer,  and  which  appears  in  the  concluding  chap- 
ters. Dean  Alford  notes  the  following  peculiarities  :  {a.)  insulating 
the  one  matter  under  discussion — up  to  a  certain  point;  (6.)  then 
introducing  the  objections;  (c)  weaving  these  parenthetic  objec- 
tions into  the  main  discussion  ;  {d.)  frequent  and  complicated  anti- 
theses ;  [e.)  frequent  plays  upon  words,  which  cannot  always  be 
reproduced  in  English;  (/!)  accumulation  of  prepositions ;  [g.) 
frequency  and  peculiarity  of  parenthetical  passages.  He  also  rightly 
calls  attention  to  the  emphatic  position  of  words,  and  to  the  dis- 
tinction of  tenses.  These  are  frequently  lost  sight  of  in  A.  V., 
but  in  the  R.  V.,  great  care  has  been  taken  to  indicate,  when  pos- 
sible in  an  English  form,  these  minute  peculiarities.  A  greater 
energy  as  well  as  abruptness  of  style  is  noticeable  in  the  earlier 
Epistles,  when  the  Apostle  was  less  wearied  by  his  incessant  labors 
and  continued  trials. 

In  the  full  vigor  of  his  manhood,  at  the  height  of  his  Christian 
activity,  this  great  Apostle  wrote  to  the  greatest  city  of  the  world 
this  Epistle,  which  presents  the  truth  he  preached  in  the  most 
symmetrical  form.  '  Although  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  belongs, 
in  the  chronological  order,  in  the  middle  of  the  Pauline  Epistles, 
yet  its  primacy  has  been  recognized  in  manifest  opposition  to  the 
alleged  primacy  of  the  Roman  bishop.    The  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 


INTRODUCTION. 


in  its  Pauline  type,  opposes,  by  its  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith 
without  the  works  of  the  law,  the  system  of  Rome ;  so  that  even  to- 
day it  can  be  regarded  as  an  Epistle  especially  directed  *'  to  the 
Roman." ' — Lange. 


LIST    OF    TOPICS    SPECIALLY    DISCUSSED. 

PAGE 

The  Pauline  Greetings 1 

^  A  righteousness  of  God  ' '.....  14 

The  Word  'Justify'  and  Kindred  Terms 50 

The  Structure  of  Chapter  5  :  12-21... 79 

Different  Theories  of  Original  Sin  and  Imputation 88 

The  Experience  Portrayed  in  Chapter  7  105 

Excursus  on  Psychological  Terms 116 

The  Word  '  Creation'  in  Chapter  8 .^ 130 

'Anathema  from  Christ' 145 

The  Pauline  View  of*  Divine  Sovereignty 148 

Relation  of  Christians  to  Rulers 215 

The  Weak  Brethren  at  Rome 220 

Excursus  on  Chapters  15,  16 255 


PBI 


fiEC 
THE  EPISTLE  bFTEAlrl;   THE  APOSTLE 


ROMANS 


Chaptee  1:  1-7. 

Address  and  G-reeting. 

1     Paul,  a  ^servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  called  to  he  an 

1  Gr.  bond-servant. 

Chapter  1 ;  1-17. 

Address,  Introductiox  and  Theme. 

Chapter  I.  contains  two  distinct  parts :  vers.  1-17  fonn  the  introductory  portion  of 
the  Epistle ;  vers.  18-32  give  the  proof  that  the  Gentiles  need  the  gospel  from  the  fact 
of  their  sinfulness  exposing  them  to  the  wrath  of  God.  (Thi-s  statement  is  the  first 
half  of  the  first  main  division  of  the  doctrinal  part  of  the  Epistle.  See  Introduction, 
g  3,  and  notes  on  vers.  16,  18.)  We  divide  vers.  1-17  into  three  paragraphs  (instead  of 
two,  as  in  the  R.  V.) :  vers.  1-7  contain  the  address  and  greeting  (in  an  unusually  full 
form);  vers.  8-15  constitute  the  Introduction  proper,  since  they  give  the  occasion  for 
the  A.postle"3  writing  to  the  Roman  Christians;  by  an  easy  transition  he  then  passes 
to  the  main  theme  of  the  Epistle,  which  is  stated  in  ver.  16,  and  further  explained  in 
ver.  17. 

Address  and  Greeting,  vers.  1^1. 

The  Apostle  conforms  to  the  usage  of  his  time,  beginning  his  letters  with  his  own 
name,  followed  by  a  designation  of  the  persons  addressed,  to  which  a  greeting  is 
added.  But  he  usually  describes  himself  as  related  to  Jesus  Christ,  indicates  the 
character  of  those  he  addresses,  and  gives  a  distinctively  Christian  salutation.  The 
most  usual  designation  of  himself  is  'an  Apostle  of  Christ  Jesus  tlirougli  the  will  of 
God'  (so  2  Cor.,  Eph.,  Col.,  2  Tim.);  in  1  and  2  Thess.,  no  designation  is  added; 
'prisoner,'  'servant,'  etc.,  occur  in  other  Epistles.  But  here  and  in  Galatians  the 
description  is  more  full,  in  view  of  the  thoughts  which  are  to  follow.  (Compare  also 
the  full  designation  in  Tit.  1 :  1-3.)  He  begins  the  address  here  by  describing  him- 
self as  '  a  servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  called  to  be  an  Apostle ;'  he  then  particularizes  his 
relation  to  the  gospel  (ver.  1) ;  but  designing  to  treat  quite  fully  of  evangelical  truth, 
be  enlarges  upon  these  relations,  introducing :  (1)  the  connection  of  the  gospel  with 
the  Old  Testament,  ver.  2 ;  (2)  the  divine-human  Person  of  Christ,  who  is  the  subject 

1 


ROMANS  I.  [1:1. 


of  this  gospel,  vers.  3,  4 ;  (3)  his  call  to  the  apostleship  of  the  Gentiles  (ver.  5),  which 
gives  him  the  right  to  address  the  Roman  Christians,  ver.  6.  Then  follows  the  usual 
apostolic  greeting,  vei-.  7.  The  fulness  of  this  address  shows  the  importance  which 
the  Apostle  attached  to  the  fundamental  thoughts  of  this  Epistle,  since  they  suggest 
themselves  at  the  very  outset,  and  are  interwoven  with  what  would  ordinarily  be 
merely  the  cuuveutional  beginning  of  a  letter. 

The  greeting  found  in  ver.  7  occurs  in  this  form  (with  trifling  variations)  in  most 
of  1  aul's  letteis.  It  is  partly  Greek,  partly  Hebrew,  in  its  origin,  but  wholly  Chris- 
tian in  its  sense.  (On  the  words  ' grace '  and  'peace,'  see  ver.  7.)  The  Pastoral  Epis- 
tles (with  the  exception  of  Titus,  according  to  the  correct  text)  contain  the  form: 
'grace,  meicy  and  peace,'  the  word  'meicy '  being  probably  derived  from  the  Greek 
version  of  the  priestly  benediction,  Num.  6 :  25.  The  Apostle  Peter  in  his  Epistles, 
and  the  Apostle  John  in  the  Apocalypse,  join  together  'grace  and  peace'  in  their 
greetings,  while  in  Jude  2  we  find  '  mejcy,  peace,  and  love.' 

The  whole  section  shows  Paul  to  be  a  model  fur  the  Christian  minister,  in  his 
humility  and  dignity,  in  the  sense  of  dependence  on  the  personal  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
which  underlies  his  authoritative  utterances,  as  well  as  in  his  devotion  to  this  great 
personal  theme  of  the  gospel  which  he  so  earnestly  desires  to  preach  everywhere. 

Ver.  1.  Paul.  See  Gen.  Introd.,  \  1. — A  servant  of  Jesus 
Christ.  The  word  'servant'  here  means  '  bond-servant '  (the  R.  V. 
usually  adds  the  literal  sense  in  the  margin),  expressing  the  fact  that 
Paul  personally  belonged  to  .Je-us  Christ,  rather  than  the  idea  of  ser- 
vice in  His  behalf.  Another  word  conveys  the  latter  sense.  Any 
unpleasant  thought  connected  with  the  former  idea  is  removed  by  the 
character  of  the  iMaster,  Jesus  Christ.  This  term  of  humility  and  de- 
pendence is  the  most  honorable  of  all  titles. — Called  to  be  an 
Apostle.  Here  he  simply  asserts  the  fact  of  his  apostolic  dignity 
and  authority ;  in  writing  to  the  Galatians,  he  was  forced  to  defend 
his  apostleship  (com p.  the  enlavged  description  of  the  word  in  Gal. 
1:  1).  He  received  the  call  on  the  way  to  Damascus  (Acts  9:  15; 
26:  17);  his  call  coincided  with  his  conversion;  it  was  confirmed  in 
the  temple  at  .Jerusalem  (Acts  9:  28;  22:  17-21).  His  setting  apart 
at  Antioch  (Acts  13:  2,  3)  was  not  the  call,  but  a  formal  recognition 
of  the  call  on  the  part  of  the  Church  there,  and  for  a  special  mission. 
The  title  is  an  official  one ;  and  while  it  might  at  first  refer  to  any 
messenger,  in  the  early  Church  it  was  soon  restricted  to  the  Twelve 
and  to  Paul,  as  chosen  witnesses  of  the  resurrection,  selected  to  lay 
the  foundation  of  the  Christian  Church.  Paul  was  not  one  of  the 
Twelve,  but  represented  the  independent  apostolate  of  the  Gentiles 
(Gal.  2:  9).  As  preachers  and  missionaries,  the  Apostles  must  have 
successors;  but  as  inspired  and  authoritative  witnesses  for  Christ, 
called  directly  by  him  for  the  xvhoJe  world,  they  have  none. — Sepa- 
rated, or,  'set  apart.'  This  explains  the  apostleship.  Paul  was  se- 
lected from  the  world,  singled  out,  consecrated  to,  and  destined  for  the 
gospel  service.  In  one  sense  this  took  place  at  his  birth  (comp.  Gal, 
1 :  15,  where  the  same  word  occurs)  ;  but  the  reference  here  is  pro- 
bably to  the  call  to  be  an  Apostle,  especially  as  the  tense  used  is  not 


1 :  2,  3  ]  ROMANS  I. 


2  apostle,  separated  unto  the  gospel  of  God,  which  he 
promised  afore  ^  by  his  proj^hets  in  the  holy  scriptures, 

i  Or,  throuyh. 

the  same  as  in  Galatians,  but  points  to  a  past  act  with  a  continuous 
result, — Unto  the  gospel  of  God.  This  was  that  for  which  he 
was  set  apart.  The  gospel  is  '  of  God,'  having  Him  as  its  author ;  it 
.is  about  Christ  (vers,  o,  4). 

Ver.  2.  Wiiich  he  promised  afore.  The  parenthesis  of  the 
A.  V.  is  unnecessary,  for  the  whole  passage  is  closely  connected.  It 
must  be  Gods  gospel,  for  He  had  already  promised  it,  and  this  thought 
would  have  force  with  the  Gentile  Christians  as  well  as  the  Jews. — By 
his  prophets. — In  the  New  Testament  the  revelation  is  always  said 
to  be  made  'by'  {vtzo)  God,  'through  (dm)  the  prophets.  The  'pro- 
phets' are  not  here  distinguished  from  the  other  Old  Testament 
writers. — In  the  holy  Scriptures. — The  article  is  wanting  in  the 
original,  but  this  can  scarcely  alter  the  accepted  sense.  The  Greek- 
speaking  Jews  probably  used  the  phrase  as  a  proper  noun,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  word  'law.'  The  omission  of  the  article,  in  such  usage, 
does  not  imply  any  indefinite  or  general  meaning.  The  reader  would 
understand  that  the  whole  Old  Testament  was  meant.  'A  slight  stress 
is  thus  thrown  upon  the  epithet  "holy."  It  is  not  merely  "in  cer- 
tain books  which  go  by  the  name  of  holy  scriptures,"  but  "in  certain 
writings  the  character  of  which  is  holy."  They  are  "holy,"  as  con- 
taining the  promises  referred  to  in  the  text,  and  others  like  them ' 
(Sanday).  In  fact,  the  entire  revelation  is  one  organic  system  of  types 
and  prophecies  pointing  to  (  hrist;  John  5:  39.  The  gospel,  Paul 
implies,  though  new,  is  yet  old. 

Yer.  3.  Concerning  his  Son.  The  punctuation  of  the  A.  V. 
connects  this  with  the  word  'gospel'  (ver.  1),  but  it  may  be  joined 
with  ver.  2:  God's  previous  promise  in  the  Old  Testament  was  con- 
cerning His  Son.  That  promise  was  fulfilled  in  the  gospel.  In  any 
case  it  is  fairly  implied  that  the  '  Son '  existed  in  a  peculiar  relation  to 
God  before  the  historical  manifestations  described  in  the  two  parallel 
clauses  which  follow.  These  clauses  each  contain  three  contrasted 
members:  (1)  was  born,  (2)  of  the  seed  of  David,  (3j  according  to 
the  flesh;  (1)  was  declared  to  be  the  Son  of  God  with  power,  f2l  by 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  (3)  according  to  the  spirit  of  holiness. — "Who 
■was  born,  or,  literally  '  became.'  Though  He  was  the  Son  of  God,  it 
was  necessary  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  Messianic  promises  that  He 
should  become  man,  hence  He  was  born. — Of  the  seed  of  David. 
This  too  was  in  fulfilment  of  the  promise,  whether  we  refer  it  to  His 
being  the  son  of  Mary,  or  the  legal  son  of  Joseph  ;  but  the  former 
seems  the  more  probable  reference. — According  to  the  flesh,  i.  e., 
according  to  His  human  nature,  or,  descent.  The  word  'flesh"  is  also 
used  of  our  sinful  nature,  but  that  sense  is  excluded  here,  since  He 
appeared  'in  the  likeness  of  the  flesh  of  sin'  (see  on  chap.  8:  2). 


ROMANS  I.  [1 :  4. 


3  concerning  his  Son,  who  was  born  of  the  seed  of  Da- 

4  vid  according  to  the  flesh,  who  was  ^declared  to  be  the 

1  Gr.  determined. 

Nor  does  the  phrase  refer  to  the  body  alone,  or  to  the  body  and  soul, 
distinguished  from  the  spirit.  'Were  He  a  mere  man,  it  had  been 
enough  to  say  that  He  was  of  the  seed  of  David ;  but  as  He  is  more 
than  man,  it  was  necessary  to  limit  His  descent  from  David  to  His 
human  nature'  (Hodge).  So  Weiss,  substantially;  Meyer  is  some- 
what obscure  in  his  view. 

Ver.  4.  Who  was  declared  to  be  the  Son  of  God.  The 
clause  is  strictly  parallel  with  'who  was  born.'  (The  word  'and'  is 
interpolated  in  the  A.  V.)  The  word  rendered  'declared'  has  been 
much  discussed.  It  first  meant  to  bound,  define,  determine  (see  mar- 
gin), etc.  In  this  case  a  mistake  of  the  Latin  Vulgate  has  confounded 
it  with  the  word  meaning  'predestined.'  The  sense  'constituted,'  in 
so  far  as  that  implies  that  the  Sonship  began  at  the  resurrection,  is  an 
impossible  one.  The  two  allowable  meanings  are:  (1)  instated  or  in- 
stalled; (2)  declai-ed,  manifested,  etc.  They  ditfer  in  this  respect 
that  (1)  points  to  what  God  did,  and  (2)  to  the  human  recognition  or 
proof  of  the  Sonship  of  Christ.  The  former  seems  to  be  the  more 
natural  sense,  but  the  latter  is  usually  accepted.  In  neither  case  is 
there  any  suggestion  that  Christ  became  the  Son  of  God  in  consequence 
of  the  resurrection,  although  the  human  nature  of  Christ  was  then  ex- 
alted, and  made  partaker  of  the  glory  which  eternally  belonged  to  the 
Son,  John  17:5.  '  For  although  Christ  was  already  the  Son  of  God  before 
the  creation  of  the  world,  and  as  such  was  sent  (chap.  8:3;  Gal.  4:  4), 
nevertheless  there  was  needed  a  fact,  by  mean?  of  which  He  should 
receive,  after  the  humiliation  that  began  with  His  birth  (Phil.  2 :  7  sqq-)» 
instating  into  the  rank  and  dignity  of  His  divine  Sonship  ;  whereby 
also,  as  its  necessary  consequence  with  a  view  to  the  knowledge  and 
conviction  of  men.  He  was  legitimately  established  as  the  Son ' 
(Meyer). — With  (lit.,  'in')  power.  This  may  be  joined  with  'de- 
clared,' setting  forth  this  act  as  an  exhibition  of  Divine  power.  It 
should  not  be  taken  adverbially  as  equivalent  to  'powerfully.'  Others 
prefer  to  join  the  phrase  with  '  Son  of  God,'  thu^  contrasting  the  ma- 
jesty and  power  of  the  risen  Son  of  God  with  the  weakness  of  His 
human  nature.  In  any  case,  the  whole  phrase  '  declared  to  be  the 
Son  of  God  with  power,'  is  to  be  taken  together  as  in  contrast  with 
'Avas  born'  (ver.  3). — According  to  the  spirit  of  holiness. 
This  is  evidently  in  contrast  with  'according  to  the  flesh,'  and  must 
set  forth  that  side  of  the  person  of  Christ  wherein  He  ditiers  absolutely 
from  those  who  are  only  human.  This  would  exclude  a  reference  to 
the  personal  Holy  Spirit,  who  is  nowhere  designated  by  this  phrase, 
also  to  the  human  spirit  of  Christ  as  distinct  from  His  body  and  soul 
(see  on  ver.  3).  God  is  a  Spirit,  hence  the  divine  nature  of  the  In- 
carnate Son  of  God  is  Spirit.    Of  this  '  spirit'  the  characteristic  quality 


1 :  4,  5.]  ROMANS  I. 


Son  of  God  ^with  power,  accordiDg  to  the  spirit  of 

holiness,  by  the  resurrection  of  the  dead ;  even  Jesus 

5  Christ  our   Lord,  through  whom  we  received  grace 

and  apostleship,  unto  obedience  ^of  faith  among  all 

1  Or,  m.  2  Or,  to  the  faith. 

is  '  holiness.'  We  reject  the  view  which  explains  'holiness'  as  'sanc- 
tific«.tion.'— By  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  Literally,  'out 
of  resurrection  of  dead.'  -Out  of  is  here  equivalent  to  'by  means 
of,'  and  not  to  'after'  or  'since,'  as  some  have  imagined.  '  Resurrec- 
tion '  though  without  the  article,  refers  to  the  historical  fact  by  virtue 
of  which  was  accom)>lished  the  exaltation  of  the  Son  of  God,  who  had 
previously  humbled  Himself  to  be  born.  Hence  it  seems  best  to  insert 
the  article  in  English.  '  Of  the  dead  '  is  probably  not  identical  with 
'  from  the  dead '  (as  in  A.  V.),  but  points  to  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
as  the  fact  which  implies  and  guarantees  the  final  resurrection  of  all 
believers. — Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  '  Having  given  this  descrip- 
tion of  the  person  and  dignity  of  the  Son  of  God,  very  man  and  very 
God,  he  now  identifies  this  divine  person  with  Jesus  Christ,  the  Lord 
and  Master  of  Christians,  the  historical  object  of  their  faith,  and  (see 
"words  following)  the  Appointer  of  himself  to  the  apostolic  office' 
(Alford).  'Jesus'  is  the  personal  name  ;  '  Christ,'  the  ofl&cial  name; 
'our  Lord.'  taking  up  the  word  applied  to  Jehovah  in  the  Septuagint, 
presents  Him  as  the  supreme  Lord  of  the  New  Dispensation,  the  per- 
sonal Master  and  King  of  all  bt-lievers.  The  full  phrase  always  has  a 
solemn  and  triumphant  tone,  and  here  serves  not  only  to  exalt  Christ, 
but  to  express  the  high  dignity  of  the  apostolic  office  (vers.  1,5),  the 
leading  idea  in  the  address. 

Ver.  5.  Through  whom,  i.  e.  '  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord,'  which  is 
placed  in  its  proper  position  in  the  R.  Y.,  and  separated  from  this 
verse  only  by  a  comma.  Everywhere  Paul  speaks  of  himsell  as  called 
by  God  to  be  an  Apostle  ('by  the  will  of  God,'  1  Cor.  1 :  1,  etc.),  but 
called  through  Jesus  (Jhrist.  who  had  spoken  to  him  on  the  way  to 
Damascus  (Acts  9:  4,  5),  and  subsequently  (iVcts  22:  17-21). — We 
received.  The  plural  is  used,  although  the  context  shows  that  he 
refers  to  himself  alone.  Such  a  custom  was  very  common  among 
Greek  authors.  —Grace  and  apostleship.  '  Grace,'  in  general ; 
and  '  apostleslup.'  in  particular.  The  latter  was  indeed  the  special 
object  and  highest  evidence  of  the  former ;  but  the  two  ideas  are  not 
to  be  confounded.  Without  the  grace  so  fully  bestowed  upon  him,  he 
could  not  have  been  an  Apostle  (comp.  Eph.  3:8);  but  his  apostle- 
ship was  a  special  gift.  As  suggested  above  (see  ver.  1),  the  Apos- 
tles, as  such,  have  no  successors ;  yet  the  connection  of  the  words, 
'grace  and  apostleship,'  implies  that  a  gift  of  grace  must  underlie  all 
genuine  service  in  the  church,  that  without  this  there  is  certaiMly  no 
call  to  the  ministry. — Unto  obedience  of  faith.  This  might  be 
paraphrased:  'in  order  to  produce  obedience  to  faith.'     'The  faith' 


ROMANS  I.  [1 :  6,  7. 


6  the  nations,  for  his  name's  sake  :  among  whom  are  ye 

7  also,  called   to   he  Jesus   Christ's :  to  all  that  are  in 
Rome,  beloved  of  God,  called  to  he  saints  :  Grace  to 

(R.  V.  marg.)  is  misleading,  for  it  suggests  a  body  of  doctrine,  whereas 
'faith'  in  the  New  Testament,  well-nigh  invariably,  means  'believing,' 
not  what  is  believed.  On  the  other  hand,  the  two  ideas  of  'obedience' 
and  '  faith '  must  not  be  confounded,  by  explaining  that  obedience 
consists  in  faith  (Calvin,  Weiss),  or  has  faith  as  its  controlling  prin- 
ciple. For  '  faith  '  is  that  to  which  the  obedience  is  rendered.  The 
end  of  his  apostleship  was  that  people  might  submit  themselves  to 
faith,  become  believers  ;  this  would  result  in  a  new  and  true  obe- 
dience, but  of  this  he  is  not  now  speaking.  That  'Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord'  was  the  object  of  this  faith  is  clear  enough. —  Among  all  the 
nations,  or,  'Gentiles,'  as  the  word  is  usually  translated,  cump.  ver. 
13.  The  only  objection  to  rendering  it  thus  in  this  instance  is  the 
probability  that  the  .Jews  may  be  included,  since  he  addresses  himself 
to  all  the  Christians  at  Rome  (vers.  6,  7),  some  of  whom  were  Jews; 
but  usually  Paul  emphasizes  his  apostleship  to  the  Gentiles.  The 
words  qualify  'unto  obedience  of  ftiith.' — For  his  name's  sake. 
For  the  glorifying  of  His  name.  Comp.  Acts  9:  16  ;  15:  26  ;  21:  13; 
2  Thess.  1 :  12.  The  end  of  his  apostleship  was  that  men  in  all  the 
nations  might  believe,  and  the  end  of  their  believing  was  the  glory  of 
Christ  in  whom  they  believed.  Hence  this  was  the  end  of  his  preach- 
ing. In  the  'name'  of  Christ  is  summed  up  all  that  He  was,  did,  and 
sufi'ei'ed.     The  expression  is  borroAved  from  the  Hebrew. 

Ver.  6.  Among  "whom  are  ye  also.  To  prepare  for  the  ad- 
dress he  says  that  his  mission  for  the  glory  of  Christ's  name  is  to  them 
also;  they  are  included  among  those  for  whom  he  received  his  apos- 
tleship.— Called  to  be  Jesus  Christ's.  They  were  not  called  by 
Jesus  Christ,  but  called  to  be  His,  since  the  call  of  believers  is  always 
referred  to  God.  The  article  is  wanting  before  '  called,'  hence  the 
comma  after  'also.'  'Called'  may  here  mean  effectually  called,  but 
'called'  and  'chosen,'  or  'elect,'  are  frequently  distinguished  in  the 
New  Testament;   Matt.  22 :   14. 

Ver,  7.  To  all  that  are  in  Rome.  This  is  the  address  proper, 
indicating  the  recipients  of  the  letter.  The  Christians  at  Rome  of 
whatever  nationality,  are  viewed  as  one  community,  though  not  ad- 
dressed as  a  '  church.'  The  city  was  so  large  that  they  may  have  wor- 
shipped in  various  domestic  congregations  (comp.  chap.  16:  5).  But 
it  does  not  follow  that  the  organizations  were  imperfect ;  for  while 
Paul  in  all  the  Epistles  written  before  this  time  (Thessalonians,  Gala- 
tians,  Corinthians)  addresses  the  churches,  in  his  subsequent  letters 
to  the  fully  organized  Christian  congregations  at  Ephesus,  Philippi, 
and  Colossae,  he  does  not.— Beloved  of  God.  Because  reconciled 
to  God  through  Christ  (chaps.  5:  5;  8:  39). — Called  to  be  saints. 
Just  as  Paul  was  called  to  be  an  Apostle   (ver.   1),  implying  that  they 


1:  8.]  ROMANS  I. 


you  and  peace  from  God  our  Father  and  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ. 

Chapter  1 :  8-15. 

Introduction  {Occasion  of  the  Epistle). 

8      First,  I  thank  my  God  through  Jesus  Christ  for 

actually  were  what  they  were  called  to  be,  '  Saints  '  refers  first  of 
all  to  consecration  to  God,  and  then,  as  a  consequence,  to  holiness. 
This  must  always  be  borne  in  mind.— Grace  to  you,  and  peace. 
This  is  the  Christian  greeting.  The  word  rendered  '  grace '  is  akin 
to  the  common  Greek  salutation,  while  'peace'  is  the  Hebrew  saluta- 
tion. The  two,  as  here  lifted  up  into  Christian  usage,  are  related  to 
each  other,  as  cause  and  effect:  the  one  is  God's  feeling  toward  us; 
the  other  the  result  in  us.  The  connection  shows  what  a  profound 
sense  is  attached  to  both.  The  greeting  seems  to  be  an  earnest  wish 
or  prayer,  rather  than  an  authoritative  benediction,  but  on  this  point 
there  is  room  for  discussion.  There  is  no  verb  in  the  original,  and  to 
this  usage  the  A.  V.  conforms  here,  but  not  elsewhere. — From  God 
our  Father.  This  refers  to  the  new  and  special  relation  which  Chris- 
tians hold  to  God,  as  adopted  sons  (Gal.  4:5;  Rom.  8  :  lo). — And  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  This  joining  of  Christ  with  God  our  Father  as 
the  personal  source  of  '  grace  and  peace '  to  us,  is  a  strong  incidental 
proof  of  the  divinity  of  Christ.  No  one  who  believed  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  would  thus  associate  the  eternal  Jehovah  with  a  mere 
man.  At  the  same  time,  we  learn  elsewhere  that  the  Father  is  the 
Author,  and  Jesus  Christ  the  mediator  and  procurer  of  these  blessings. 
This  section  assumes  the  fundan  ental  ficts  of  Christianity.  Written 
less  than  thirty  years  after  the  death  of  Christ,  to  a  body  of  believers 
far  removed  from  Judoea,  it  is  itself  sufficient  evidence  that  the  Gospels 
contain  history,  and  not  myths  or  fictions,  that  the  doctrines  peculiar 
to  Christianity  were  proclaimed  and  believed  from  the  first,  and  are 
not  the  inventions  of  after  ages.  Paul  goes  further,  and  affirms  that 
the  main  facts  were  promised  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  Person  of 
Christ,  the  Incarnation,  the  Resurrection,  the  universal  Lordship  of 
Jesus  Christ,  these  are  the  facts.  Faith  in  Him,  loyal  allegiance  to 
Him,  universal  proclamation  of  Him — all  for  His  glory — this  is  the 
human  response  to  the  facts  of  salvation.  This  was  the  substance  of 
Christianity  in  the  first  century,  and  this  its  substance  now.  Such  a 
gospel  is  imperishable,  and  the  letter  which  treats  of  it  most  syste- 
matically is  not  for  one  place  and  one  age  alone,  but  'of  universal  in- 
terest and  of  permanent  authority,  even  as  this  distinctively  Christian 
greeting  is  as  precious  to  us  now  as  to  the  Roman  Christians  then. 

Introduction  (Occasion  of  the  Epistle),  vers.  8-15. 

After  the  full  and  formal  address  and  greeting,  the  Apostle,  as  usual,  begins  with 
thanksgiving  on  behalf  of  the  Christians  addressed.     (In  Galatians  a  rebuke  takes 


ROMANS  I.  [1 :  8,  9. 


you  all,  Hhat  your  faith  is  proclaimed  throughout 

9  the  whole  world.     For  God    is    my  witness,  whom 

I    serve   in   my    spirit    in    the   gospel    of    his   Son, 

1  Or,  because.  , 

the  place  of  the  thanksgiving.)  Here  Paul  gives  thanks,  and  that  through  Jesus 
Christ,  for  the  extended  fame  of  the  faith  of  the  Christians  at  Rome  (ver.  8),  and 
then  mentions  his  constant  prayer  for  them  (ver.  9),  and  especially  his  prayerful 
desiie  to  come  to  them  (ver.  10),  for  their  common  edification  (vers.  11,  12).  His 
unfulfilled  purpose  to  come  that  he  might  have  fruit  among  them  also  (ver.  13), 
grows  out  of  his  obligation  to  preach  the  gospel  to  all  men  (ver.  14),  hence  his  readi- 
ness to  preach  to  them  also  (ver.  15).  The  non-fulfilment  of  this  desire  and  purpose 
occasioned  the  Epistle;  the  main  thought  of  which  immediately  follows  (vers.  iG,  17). 

Ver.  8.  First.  There  is  no  corresponding  *  secondly,'  an  omission 
not  uncommon  in  Paul's  writings.  Comp.  chap.  3:  2,  where  the  R. 
V.  renders:  'first  of  all.' — I  thank  my  God.  (See  introductory 
note.)  'The  Apostle  pursues  the  natural  course  of  first  placing  him- 
self, so  to  speak,  in  relation  with  his  readers  ;  and  his  first  point  of 
contact  with  them  is  gratitude  for  their  participation  in  Christianity' 
(De  Wette).  There  is  a  touching  empliasis  in  the  phrase  'my  God,' 
with  its  personal  appropriation  and  corresponding  sense  of  personal 
obligation.  In  this  expression  he  sums  up  '  all  those  experiences  he 
had  personally  made'  (Godet)  of  the  covenant  faithfulness  of  God. — 
Through  Jesus  Christ.  The  thanksgiving  is  through  Christ; 
comp.  Heb.  3  :  15,  and  similar  passages.  Jesus  Christ  is  also  the  me- 
dium through  whom  came  the  blessings  for  which  he  is  thankful ;  but 
the  other  thought  is  the  prominent  one. — For  you  all.  The  thanks- 
giving was  concerning  them,  or,  on  their  behalf. — That.  The  word 
also  means  'because;'  but  here  the  two  senses  are  practically  the 
same.  —  Your  faith  is  proclaimed,  declared  among  Christians. 
That  the  Roman  Church  was  comparatively  unknown  to  unbelievers, 
even  to  the  Jews  at  Rome,  appears  from  Acts  28:  22.  The  praise- 
worthy character  of  their  faith  may  be  inferred  from  the  thanksgiving. 
— Throughout  the  v^hole  -world.  '  A  popular  hyperbole ;  but  how 
accordant  with  the  position  of  the  church  in  that  city,  toward  which 
the  eyes  of  the  whole  world  were  turned!'  (Meyer.) 

Ver.  9.  For.  This  introduces  a  solemn  proof  of  his  thanksgiving. 
— God  is  my  ■witness.  Such  appeals  to  God  are  not  uncommon  in 
Paul's  writings.  God  only  could  know  what  his  habit  in  secret  prayer 
was.  The  fact  ,was  important,  since  he  had  labored  so  widely  and  yet 
not  visited  them.  This  might  seem  like  ignorance  or  forgetfulness  of 
them. — Whom  I  serve  in  my  spirit.  This  adds  strength  to  the 
solemn  asseveration.  The  word  translated  'serve'  is  used  in  the  Sep- 
tuagint  of  priestly  service,  and  probably  retains  some  such  force  here. 
He  renders  true  service,  not  in  the  temple,  but  in  his  '  spirit.'  '  Spirit' 
is  the  highest  part  of  man's  nature,  and  in  passages  like  this  the  refe- 


1  :  10,  11.]  ROMANS  I. 


how  unceasingly  I  make  mention  of  you,  always  in 

10  my  prayers   making  request,  if  by  any  means  now  at 
length    I  may  be  prospered  ^  by  the  will   of  God  to 

11  come  unto  you.     For  I   long  to  see  you,  that  I  may 
impart  unto  you  some  S2:)iritual  gift,  to  the  end  ye 

1  Gr.  in. 

rence  is  to  the  human  spirit,  not  so  much  as  a  mode  of  being,  as  the 
sphere  of  the  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  (Corap.  Weiss,  and  Excur- 
sus at  the  close  of  chap.  7.)  Meyer  says:  '  in  my  moral  self-conscious- 
ness, whiirh  is  the  living  inner  sphere  of  that  service.'  But  it  is  a 
regenerated  moral  self-consciousness  (so-Godet). — In  the  gospel  of 
his  Son.  The  gospel  concerning  His  Son  (comp.  ver.  S).  'Ihis  is 
the  sphere  of  the  service  from  another  point  of  view;  his  service  is 
not  the  performance  of  a  ritual,  but  the  proclamation  of  the  gospel, 
the  good  tidings  about  the  Son  of  God.  Jsotice  here  and  throughout 
that  the  gospel  is  spoken  of,  not  as  the  gospel  of  Jesus,  but  as  the 
gospel  of  God,  the  gospel  of  Christ,  the  gospel  of  His  Son.  Paul 
served  God  by  telling  the  good  tidings  of  the  Sou  of  God,  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord  (vers.  1-5).  -  How  unceasingly.  The  R.  V.  correctly 
indicates  that  it  is  the  mode,  rather  than  the  simple  fact,  or  the  de- 
gree, which  is  brought  out.— I  make  mention  of  you.  ^otice  the 
more  correct  punctuation  of  the  R.  V.  The  remembrance  is  not  a 
mere  recollection,  but  an  active  recalling  of  them. — Al"ways  in  my 
prayers,  or,  at  my  prayers,  /.  e.,  always  when  engaged  in  prayer. 

Ver.  10.  Making  request.  How  unceasingly  he  remembers 
them  is  evident  from  this  constant  petition,  the  purport  of  which  is 
next  expressed. — If  by  any  means,  etc.  Instead  of  saying:  'that 
I  may  come,'  the  Apostle  uses  this  conditional  form,  which  indicates 
both  his  earnest  desire  and  bis  submission  of  it  to  God's  will. — Now 
at  length,  on  some  occasion.  This  implies  both  earnest  wish  and 
long  delay  (both  of  which  are  expressed  in  ver.  13),  and  also  the  pos- 
sibility that  he  might  be  delayed  much  longer.  Three  years  inter- 
vened before  his  desire  was  granted. — I  may  be  prospered.  The 
A.  V.  follows  the  incorrect  rendering  of  the  Vulgate.  The  word 
means  to  succeed,  to  have  the  good  fortune;  the  idea  of  journeying, 
which  belonged  to  it  originally,  was  lost  in  the  usage  of  that  time. — 
By  the  will  of  God.     This  belongs  to  <  prospered,'  not  to  '  come.' 

Ver.  11.  For  I  long  to  see  you.  This  longing  was  the  reason 
of  his  constant  petition.  There  is  no  needless  repetition,  since  this 
verse  and  what  follows  show  that  thanksgiving,  remembrance,  peti- 
tion, and  longing,  all  grow  out  of  his  desire  to  preach  that  gospel, 
which  he  is  about  to  set  forth  in  this  Epistle.  — Some  spiritual  gift. 
'Spiritual'  means,  wrought  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  not  simply  be- 
longing to  the  inner  life.  Appai*ently,  Paul  never  uses  the  word  in 
the  latter  sense.  'Gift'  does  not  refer  to  miraculous  gifts,  but  to  all 
gifts  of  grace.     'Some,'  expresses  'not  only  the  Apostle's  modesty,  but 


10  ROMANS  I.  [1:  12,  13. 

12  may  be  established  ;  that  is,  that  I  with  you  may  be 
comforted  in  you,  each  of  us  by  the  other's  faith,  both 

13  yours  and  mine.  And  I  Avould  not  have  you  ignorant, 
brethren,  that  oftentimes  I  purposed  to  come  unto 
you  (and  I  was  hindered  hitherto)  that  I  might  have 

an  acknowledgment  that  the  Romans  were  already  in  the  faith,  to- 
gether with  an  intimation  that  something  wt^s  still  wanting  in  them' 
(Lange). — To  the  end,  etc.  This  was  the  object  of  the  desired  im- 
partation  of  spiritual  gifts  ;  they  were  not  desired  for  their  own  sake. 
— Be  established,  or,  '  strengthened.'  The  agent  would  be  the  Holy 
Spirit  (comp.  'spiritual');  Paul  was  but  the  instrument  (see  next 
verse). 

Ver.  12.  That  is,  etc.  'By  this  modifying  explanation,  subjoined 
with  humility,  and  expressed  in  a  delicate  complimentary  manner, 
Paul  guards  himself,  in  the  presence  of  a  church  to  which  he  was  still 
a  stranger,  from  the  possible  appearance  of  presumption  and  of  form- 
ing too  low  an  estimate  of  the  Christian  position ^of  his  readers'  . 
(Meyer). — I  AArith  you  may  be  comforted  in  you.  The  phrase 
is  difficult  to  translate ;  since  in  the  original  there  is  a  compound  verb 
which  means  'comforted  with,'  i.  e.,  at  the  same  time  with,  and  also 
an  added  phrase,  which  means  'among  you,'  lit.,  '  in  you.'  We  prefer 
'  among  you,'  and  explain  :  That  he  might  be  comforted,  i,  e.,  encour- 
aged and  helped,  as  these  ideas  are  included  in  the  New  Testament 
use  of  the  word,  at  the  same  time  when  they  were,  namely,  when  by 
the  fulfilment  of  his  purpose,  he  should  be  '  among  them.'  The  literal 
sense  '  in  you  '  (R.  V.)  indicates  that  the  comfort  was  found  in  them. — 
Ilach  of  us,  etc.  The  rendering  of  the  R.  V.  has  been  for  some 
time  generally  accepted.  This  turn  of  the  thought  indicates  that  their 
faith  is  the  same,  tliat  they  can,  therefore,  help  and  comfort  one  an- 
other ;  the  closing  expression  shows  tact  and  modesty.  One  can 
scarcely  fail  to  remark  how  the  tone  of  Paul  differs  from  that  of  the 
Roman  Popes. 

Ver.  13.     And  I  -would  not  have  you  ignorant  (comp.  chap. 

11  :  25).  The  phrase  lays  stress  on  what  is  said.  The  progress  of 
thought  is  natural.  Paul  had  expressed  his  prayerful  longing  to  see 
tliem  (vers.  9-12),  he  now  tells  them  that  this  longing  had  not  been 
inactive;  it  had  frequently  led  to  a  definite  purpose  to  visit  them. — 
Brethren.  This  aifectionate  address  agrees  well  with  the  fraternal 
tone  of  ver.  12.— Oftentimes  I  purposed.  In  his  frequent  visits 
to  Greece  such  a  purpose  would  readily  be  formed  (comp.  chap.  15  : 
23). — And  ^vas  hindered  hitherto.  This  is  a  parenthetical  ex- 
planation, introduced  by  '  and,'  not  '  but.'  The  word  '  let'  (A.  V.)  is 
an  instance  of  entire  reversal  of  meaning  in  English  usage.  The  hin- 
drances are  not  specified  ;  but  we  infer  from  chap.  15  :  20-24,  that  he 
felt  it  to  be  his  first  duty  to  preach  where  the  gospel  had  not  yet  been  pro- 
claimed.    At  the  same  time,  his  necessary  journeys  to  Jerusalem,  and 


1:  14,  15.]  ROM. INS  I.  11 

some  fruit  in  you  also,  even  as  in  the  rest  of  the  Geu- 

14  tiles.     I  am  debtor  both  to  Greeks  and  to  Barbarians, 

15  both  to  the  wise  and  to  the  foolish.     So,  as  much  as 

the  task  of  organizing  the  Gentile  churches,  of  correcting  their  errors 
(coinp.  Galatians),  of  allaying  dissensions  (comp.  Coriuthians),  filled 
up  his  time.  It  is  nowhere  hinted  that  he  was  forbidden  to  preach 
there. — That  I  might  have  some  fruit.  The  nmin  thought  is 
here  resumed.  The  tigure  is  quite  common.  The  '  fruit  "  is  the  har- 
vest to  be  gathered  and  presented  to  God.  Hence  it  is  not  Paul's  re- 
ward, or  the  result  of  his  labors  merely,  but  the  good  works 
produced  among  the  Roman  Christians,  as  fruit  unto  God  (comp. 
ver.  11).  The  conversion  of  others  is  not  alluded  to. — In  (or, 
'among ')  you  also.  The  literal  sense  would  emphasize  the  internal 
character  of  the  fruit-bearing  :  but  '  among.'  which  is  a  frequent  sense 
of  the  preposition,  is,  on  the  whole,  to  be  preferred. — In  (or,  -among') 
the  rest  of  the  Gentiles.  In  ver.  5,  the  word  is  rendered  '  na- 
tions,' but  here  the  reference  to  '  Gentiles'  is  more  marked,  since  there 
is  a  marked  hint  of  his  special  mission  as  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles, 
carried  out  in  the  next  verse. 

Ver.  14.  I  am  debtor.  'Paul  regards  the  divine  obligation  of 
office,  received  through  Christ  (ver.  5),  as  the  undertaking  of  a  debt, 
which  he  has  to  discharge  by  preaching  the  gospel  among  all  Gentile 
nations.  Comp.  in  reference  to  this  subject.  Acts  2b:  17  f.  ;  Gal.  2: 
7;  1  Cor.  9:  16'  (Meyer).  Until  he  had  fruit  among  the  Romans,  as 
among  the  rest  of  the  Gentiles  (ver.  13),  this  debt  was  not  paid. — To 
Greeks  and  to  Barbarians.  The  Greeks  called  all  other  peoples 
'Barbarians'  ;  the  word  having  reference  to  the  strange,  unintelligible 
language.  It  became  a  term  of  reproach,  because  the  Greeks,  with 
their  pride  of  race  and  culture,  and  the  Romans,  with  their  pride  of 
power,  looked  down  upon  other  nations.  The  Romans,  accoi'diug  to 
the  usage  of  those  days,  were  not  counted  among  the  '  Barbarians,' 
but  the  Apostle  probably  dees  not  class  them  here  at  all,  for  at  Rome 
were  representatives  of  all  nations  and  all  shades  of  culture  and  igno- 
rance. He  is  debtor  to  all,  whatever  may  be  the  distinction  of 
language  or  race.  The  .Jews  are  left  out,  because  he  is  speaking  of 
his  debt  to  the  Gentiles.— Both  to  the  -wise  and  to  the  foolish. 
This  expresses  the  diUerence  of  natural  intelligence  and  cultivation  in 
every  nation  ;  it  is  not  a  repetition  of  the  previous  clause.  The  article 
is  omitted  in  the  original,  and  is  not  necessary  in  Enslish  ;  ♦  unwise' 
(  A.  V.)  suggests  a  verbal  correspondence  which  does  not  exist  in  the 
Greek.  'Foolish'  is  too  strong  and  contemptuous.  The  two  pairs  to- 
gether 'are  used,  apparently,  merely  as  comprehending  all  Gentiles, 
whether  considered  in  regard  of  race  or  of  intellect ;  and  are  placed 
here  certainly  not  without  a  prospective  reference  to  the  universality 
of  guilt,  and  need  of  the  gospel,  which  he  is  presently  about  to  prove 
existed  in  the  Gentile  world'  (Alford). 

Ver.  lo.     So,  i.  <?.,  in  accordance  with  this  position  of  debtor  (ver. 


12  ROMANS  I.  [1:  16. 

in  me  is,  I  am  ready  to  preach  the  gospel  to  you  also 
that  are  in  Rome. 

Chapter  1  :  16,  17. 

The  Tfieme  of  the  Epistle. 

16      For  I  am  not  ashamed  of  the  gospel :  for  it  is  the 

14).  Other  explanations  are  less  satisfactory. — As  much  as  in  me 
is,  or,  '  as  far  as  in  me  lies.'  The  phrase  is  a  strong  one,  as  if  to  say  : 
'  As  far  as  it  depends  on  me,  I  am  anxious  to  come  and  preach  to 
you,  but  my  will  is  subject  to  the  will  of  God,  who  may  have  decreed 
it  otherwise ;'  comp.  vers.  10,  13. — I  am  ready.  This  is  a  correct 
paraphrase  of  a  difficult  Greek  expression. — To  preach  the  gospel. 
One  word  in  the  original,  to  evangelize. — To  you  also  that  are  in 
Rome.  The  Clnistians  in  Rome  are  meant  here,  as  throughout.  The 
gospel,  which  ihey  had  already  heard  from  others,  he  was  ready  to 
preach  to  tliem,  that  he  might  have  fruit  among  them  also  (ver.  13). 
To  refer  it  to  unconverted  Romans  is  incorrect,  both  because  af  the 
use  of 'you'  in  what  precedes,  and  because  his  readiness  to  preach 
this  gospel  to  those  who  had  already  received  it  is  the  warrant  ior 
writing  it  to  believers.  Emphasis  ret-ts  upon  '  you  also  in  Rome.'  It 
was  the  capital  of  the  world  ;  even  there  he  would  not  be  '  ashamed  of 
the  gospel'  (ver.  16).  'Paul  subsequently  attained  the  object  of  his 
wishes,  though  not  according  to  human  purposes,  but  according  to  the 
counsel  of  God:  first  as  a  prisoner,  and  last  as  a  martyr '  (Lange). 
The  very  same  power  is  required  to  make  men  missionaries  as  to 
make  them  martyrs.  '  In  the  former  section  our  spirits  bowed  before 
one  who  stood  so  high  in  the  service  of  so  great  a  master.  But  now  the 
ambassador  of  Christ  comes  to  us  as  one  like  ourselves.  Across  the 
waters  which  roll  between  him  and  us,  we  hear  a  brother's  voice  and 
see  a  bi'other's  face'  (Beet). 

The  Theme  of  the  Epistle,  vers.  16,  17. 

(The  close  connection  with  ver.  15  justifies  the  R.  V.  in  joining  these  verses  with  the 
preceding  paragraph.  They  are  placed  bj-  themselves  here  to  bring  out  more  fully 
their  peculiar  relation  to  the  Epistle  as  a  whole.) 

Paul  is  ready  to  preach  at  Rome  also,  because  he  is  not  ashamed  of  the  gospel ;  and 
he  is  not  ashamed  of  the  gospel,  because  of  its  character  (ver.  16).  The  whole  Epistle, 
to  the  end  of  chap.  11,  is  an  expansion  of  the  latter  part  of  ver.  16.  The  gospel  is  to 
'  every  one,'  for  every  one  needs  it  (chap.  1 :  18—3 :  2  ).;  it  is  '  to  every  one  that  be- 
lieveth,'  for  this  is  the  one  way  (chaps.  3:  21-4:  25) ;  it  is  '  God's  power  unto  salva- 
tion,' for  thus  salvation  is  accomplished  (chaps,  o:  1-8:  39);  it  is  'to  the  Jew  fii-st, 
and  also  to  the  Greek,'  for  the  rejection  of  it  by  the  Jews  is  but  temporary  (chaps. 
9-11.) 

In  ver.  17  it  is  further  explained  how  the  gospel  is  'God's  power  unto  salvation.' 
It  is  a  revelation  of  God's  'righteousness'  (of  a  righteousness  coming  from  Him),  and 


1:  16.]  ROMANS  I.  13 

power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that  be- 
lieveth  ;    to    the  Jew   first,  and  also  to  the   Greek. 

that  too  by  faith,  as  had  alreadj'  been  set  forth  in  the  Old  Testament.    These  verses 
therefore  contain  the  fundamental  truths  of  God's  plan  of  salvation. 

Ver.  16.  For  I  am  not  ashamed.  This  gives  the  reason  for  his 
being  ready  to  preach  at  Rome  also  (ver.  15),  and  forms  an  easy  tran- 
sition to  the  statement  which  follows.  Rome,  the  metropolis  of  the 
heathen  world,  with  all  its  pride  of  power,  presented  a  held,  where, 
if  anywhere,  one  might  be  tempted  to  be  ashamed  of  the  gospel  which 
centred  in  a  Person  whom  Roman  soldiers  had  crucified.  Comp.  Gal. 
6  :  14,  and  chap.  5  :  2.— Of  the  gospel.  The  message  itself  which 
he  proclaims,  not  the  work  of  proclaiming  it.  The  word  gospel  (evan- 
geliura)  means  the  good  tidings  of  salvation  by  Jesus  Christ.'  Hence 
it  is  not  merely  a  set  of  ideas,  or  a  code  of  morals,  but  certain  facts 
which  are  lold  that  men  may  believe  on  Hinoi  in  Mhom  they  centre 
(vers.  3.  4),  and  thus  believing  live  through  and  iii  Him.  The  refer- 
ence to  Christ  is  so  obvious  that  the  phrase  '  of  Christ'  was  added.  It 
is  to  be  omitted,  according  to  the  testimony  of  the  mass  of  ancient 
authorities.  Paul  knew  no  ether  gospel  than  the  gospel  of  (i.  e.,  about) 
Christ ;  comp.  Gal.  1  :  6-9. — For.  The  reason  for  not  being  ashamed 
is  the  nature  of  the  gospel. —The  power  of  God,  or,  'God's  power.' 
The  article  is  not  found  in  the  Greek,  but  the  idea  is  made  definite  by 
the  word  'God's.'  It  comes  from  Him,  belongs  to  Him,  in  and 
through  it  He  works  efficaciously.  'By  awaking  repentance,  faith, 
comfort,  love,  peace,  joy,  courage  in  life  and  death,  hope,  etc.,  the 
gospel  manifests  itself  as  powor,  as  a  mighty  potency,  and  that  of  God, 
whose  revelation  and  work  the  gospel  is'  (Meyer).  Writing  to  Rome, 
the  city  of  worldly  power,  he  calls  the  gospel  God's  power  ;  writing 
to  Corinth,  the  city  of  worldly  wisdom,  he  calls  the  gospel  God's  wis- 
dom (1  Cor.  2:  7,  etc.). — Unto  salvation.  This  includes  both  re- 
demption from  sin  and  positive  privilege  ;  a  share  in  the  eternal  glory  of 
the  Messiah's  kingdom.  '  Salvation  '  includes  more  than  moral  im- 
provement or  continual  happiness  ;  it  is,  on  its  positive  side,  the 
equivalent  of  '  life,'  in  its  full  New  Testament  sense.-  To  every  one, 
not  to  the  Jew  alone  (see  next  clause).  The  subsequent  argument 
(vers.  18—3;  20)  shows  that  every  one  needs  this  power  unto  salva- 
tion; guilt  being  universal. — Believeth.  This  is  the  subjective  con- 
dition of  the  gospel  salvation  ;  faith  lays  hold  of  what  the  gospel  pre- 
sents. There  may  be  a  contrast  to  Jewish  legalism, — as  in  the  subse- 
quent discussion  (chap.  8:  21-4;  25).  Comp.  ver.  17. — To  the 
Jew  first.  First  in  time,  but  including  more  than  this  'First,  in 
having  a  prior  claim,  as  the  covenanted  people  of  God  :  first,  therefore, 
in  the  season  of  its  offer,  but  not  in  the  condition  of  its  recipient  after 
its  acceptance'  (Wordsworth).  In  chaps.  9-11  this  priority  of  the 
Jews  is  discussed  in  view  of  the  general  rejection  of  the  gospel  by  that 
people.— And  also  to  the  Greek.     'Greek'  is  here  equivalent  to 


14  ROMANS  I.  [1:  17. 

17  For  therein  is  revealed  a  righteousness  of  God  ^  hy  * 

1  Gv.froyn    *  For  by  read /rom  and  omit  marginal  rendering. — Am.  Com. 

'Gentile;'  comp.  Acts  14  :  1  ;  and  1  Cor.  10:  32,  where  tlie  A.  V. 
translates  'Gentiles.'  Greek  and  Barbarian  (ver.  14),  was  a  natioiial 
distinction  used  by  the  Greeks  ;  Jew  and  Greek,  a  religious  one  used 
by  the  Jews  ;  in  both  cases  including  all  mankind. 

Ver.  17.  For.  The  proof  of  ver.  16,  especially  of  the  assertion 
that  the  gospel  is  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation, — Therein ;  in  the 
gospel. — A  righteousness  of  God,  The  word  '  righteous,'  so  fre- 
quent in  the  Old  Testament,  is  used  of  conformity  to  law,  equivalent 
to  holy,  perfect.  It  is  applied  absolutely  to  God  alone,  and  the  entire 
family  of  familiar  terms  has  a  religious  significance.  'Righteousness,' 
when  used  of  man,  means  conformity  to  the  holy  will  and  law  of  God, 
as  the  ultimate  standard  of  right ;  when  used  of  God,  it  expresses  one 
of  His  attributes,  essentially  the  same  with  His  holiness  and  goodness, 
as  manifested  in  His  dealings  with  His  creatures,  especially  with  men. 
Closely  allied  with  these  words  is  another,  meaning  to  declare  or  pro- 
nounce one  righteous,  expressed  in  English  by  the  word  'justify,'  de- 
rived from  the  Latin  equivalent  of  '  righteous.'  It  is  unfortunate  that 
the  correspondence  cannot  be  preserved.  In  this  verse  '  a  righteous- 
ness of  God'  in  itself,  might  mean  :  (1)  a  righteousness  which  belongs  to 
God  ;  (2)  a  righteousness  which  comes  from  God;  (3)  a  righteousness 
which  He  approves.  But  the  discussion  in  chaps.  3,  4,  leaves  no  room 
for  doubting  that  the  correct  meaning  is  (2),  a  righteousness  of  which 
God  is  the  author,  and  that  too  His  free  gift,  so  that  it  is  reckoned  to 
the  believer  (chap.  3  :  21-25).  But  while  this  is  to  be  insisted  upon  as 
the  prominent  thought,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind:  {a)  That  neither 
here  nor  elsewhere  is  'righteousness'  exactly  equivalent  to  'justifica- 
tion,' or,  God's  method  of  iustification.  [b)  That  this  revelation  of 
'  righteousness  from  God,'  by  imputation,  grows  out  of  the  righteous- 
ness which  belongs  to  God  ;  in  the  gospel  He  reveals  His  own  right- 
eousness by  revealing  that  He  is  'just  and  the  justifier  of  him  that 
hath  faith  in  Jesus'  (chap.  3  :  26) ;  nothing  shoAvs  His  righteousness 
so  plainly  as  the  death  of  Christ  for  our  Redemption,  (c)  Hence  tjiis 
'  righteousness  from  God,'  freely  reckoned  to  the  believer,  necessarily 
leads  to  a  change  of  character  in  the  sinner  who  believes,  so  that  the 
righteousness  imputed  '  becomes  righteousness  inwrought.'  This  is 
necessarily  the  case :  because  when  God  accounts  a  man  righteous.  He 
is  pledged  to  make  him  so :  because  faith  which  lays  hold  on  this  im- 
puted righteousness  brings  the  justified  man  into  living  fellowship 
with  Jesus  Christ,  who  gives  him  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and  because  on  the 
human  side  this  method  of  pardon  and  reconciliation  affords  motives 
for  well-doing,  which  that  Holy  Spirit  uses  to  fulfil  the  pledge  God 
makes  of  sanctifying  the  believer.  It  has  been  found  that  a  denial  of 
the  fundamental  sense  (righteousness  from  God,  imputed  by  Him) 
leads  to  a  practical  obscuration  of  both  the  other  senses  ;  while  God 
has  been  proven  righteous  and  man  made  righteous  by  the  mainte- 


1  :  17.]  ROMANS  I.  15 

faith  unto  faith  :  as  it  is  written.  But  the  righteous 
shall  liv^e  ^  by  faith. 

1  Gr.  from. 

nance  of  the  truths  that  in  the  gospel  He  reveals  a  righteousness 
which  He  puts  to  the  account  of  the  believer. — Revealed.  The 
present  tense  indicates  continued  action  :  it  is  being  revealed,  it  is 
continuously  proclaimed  and  made  known.  In  the  Old  Testament  it 
was  promised  and  prepared  for,  but  first  made  known  fully  in  the 
gospel. —  From  faith.  The  rendering  'by'  (Eng.  Com.)  suggests  an 
unlikely  S'  nse,  and  was  probably  adopted  to  show  that  the  Greek 
preposition  is  the  same  as  in  the  last  clause.  The  entire  phrase  from 
faith  unto  faith  is  to  be  joined  with  'revealed,'  not  with  'righteous- 
ness.' The  righteousness  is  revealed  'from  faith,'  as  the  starting- 
point,  and  '  to  faith  '  as  its  aim,  continually  producing  new  faith.  This 
is  substantially  the  generally  accepted  explanation.  (It  is  improper 
to  refer  '  from  faith'  to  God's  faithfulness.)  The  gospel  makes  known 
constantly  ihat  faith  on  Christ  is  the  subjective  cause  of  the  righteous- 
ness from  God,  the  condition  of  its  imputation,  the  organ  Avhich  ap- 
propriates it ;  and  it  further  makes  known  that  thus  faith  is  pro- 
duced ;  faith  is  the  beginning  and  end,  the  vital  principle  is  ever  the 
same.'  '  Faith,'  in  the  New  Testament,  has  well-nigh  invariably  the 
subjective  sense,  not  who.tis  believed,  but  beliering.  It  includes  know- 
ledge and  belief,  assent  and  surrender,  appropriation  and  application  ; 
and  hence  cannot  be  limited  to  a  purely  intellectual  credence. — As  it 
is  "written.  By  this  passage  (Hab.  2:4),  Paul  would  show  that 
this  revelation  of  righteousness  from  God,  from  faith  and  to  faith, 
is  in  accordance  with  the  Old  Testament  Scripture,  and  hence  accord- 
ing to  the  divine  plan. — The  righteous.  The  rendering  'just'  ob- 
literates the  verbal  correspondence  with  '  righteousness.'  Paul  here 
refers  to  one  who  possesses  the  righteousness  from  God.  If  this  were 
not  the  case  the  quotation  would  lack  point. — Shall  live  by  faith  ; 
or,  '  the  righteous  by  faith  shall  live.'  The  former  view  of  'the  connec- 
tion agrees  better  with  the  original  prophecy  of  Habakkuk,  where 
'  fiith  '  is  equivalent  to  '  faithfulness'  (both  having  the  same  fundamen- 
tal idea  of  trust  in  God).  The  latter,  however,  is  accepted  by  some,  on 
the  ground  that  Paul,  in  this  case,  is  seeking  to  prove  from  the  Old 
Testament  not  a  life  by  faith,  but  the  revelation  of  righteousness  by 
faith.  (The  marsrinal  note  of  the  R.  V.  indicates  that  '  by  '  here  is  the 
same  word  as  that  rendered  '  from '  in  the  pi-eceding  clause.)  In 
any  case,  Paul  clearly  holds  that  if  the  righteous  man  truly  lives, 
it  is  because  he  has  been  accounted  righteous  by  faith;  comp.  Gal. 
3:  11,  where  the  same  passage  is  quoted.  In  favor  of  the  con- 
nection 'live  by  faith,'  we  may  urge  the  greater  emphasis  which 
falls  upon  'by  foith,'  in  accordance  with  the  order  of  the  Greek,  We 
add  a  paraphrase  of  these  important  verses:  To  you  Romans  also  I 
am  ready  to  preach,  for  even  in  your  imperial  city  I  would  not  be 


16  ROMANS  I.  [1:  18. 

Chapter  1:  18-32. 

The  Sinfulness  of  the  Gentiles. 

18      For  Hhe  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven 
against  all  ungodliness  and  unrighteousness  of  men, 

1  Or,  a  wrath. 

ashamed  of  the  gospel.  How  can  I  be  ashamed  of  it  before  any  sinful 
man,  since  it  is  that  through  and  in  which  God's  power  works  so  as  to 
save  men,  all  of  whom  are  sinful,  and  any  one  of  whom  can  be  thus 
saved  when  he  believes — whether  he  be  of  God's  ancient  people,  to 
whom  it  was  first  preached,  or  of  the  Gentiles,  It  is  God's  power  unto 
salvation  because  it  brings  to  sinful  men  lighteousness  which  comes 
from  God,  given  freely  by  Him,  so  that  they  are  accounted  righteous 
(and  made  righteous  because  He  so  accounts  them) ;  and  this,  not  by 
any  impossible  way,  but  repealed  from  faith  as  its  starting-point  and 
faith  as  its  terminal  point :  whatever  of  righteousness  man  has  comes 
by  faith.  And  this  was  God's  way,  predicted  already  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, for  He  there  says:  The  man  who  is  declared  righteous  lives 
hy  faith  (or,  the  man  who  is  righteous  by  faith  lives). 

DOCTRINAL  PART.     CHAPTERS  I:  18— XL 

Chapters  1:  18—3:  20. 

I.  Universal  Need. 
Having  asserted  that  the  gospel  is  God's  power  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that 
believeth,  whether  Jew  or  Greek,  the  Apostle  proceeds  to  show  that  all  men  are  sin- 
ners, and  therefore  can  be  saved  only  by  this  method.  He  first  (I)  describes  the  sin- 
fulness of  the  Gentiles  (chap.  1 :  18-32),  and  then  (2  proves  that  the  .Jews  are  equally 
in  need  of  this  salvation  (chaps.  2-3  :  20).  This  proof  of  the  universality  of  sinfulness 
establishes  directly  the  propriety  of  using  the  phrase  '  every  one'  in  ver.  16,  while  it 
indirectly  proves  that  'God's  power'  is  needed,  and  that  only  he  that  'believeth'  can 
be  saved.  Since  all  are  sinners  they  cannot  save  tliemselves,  and  must  be  saved  by 
faith. 

1.  The  Sinfulness  of  the  Gentiles,  vers.  18-32. 
This  fearful,  yet  truthful,  description  of  the  moral  decay  of  the  Gentile  world  is  not 
introduced  abruptly.  In  ver.  17  the  Apostle  had  declared  that  righteousness  from 
God  was  revealed  by  faith  ;  be  now  proves  this  (and  thus  the  position  of  ver.  16)  by 
the  fact  that  God's  wrath  is  revealed  against  unrighteousness.  This  is,  indeed,  a 
revelation  of  God's  punitive  righteousness;  but  it  shows  that  sinful  men  can  be  saved 
only  through  the  gospel.  Ver.  18  suggests  the  thoughts  developed  more  fully  in  the 
entire  section.  In  vers.  19-23  the  Apostle  shows  whij  this  wrath  was  revealed ;  in 
vers.  24-32,  how  it  was  revealed :  but  iu  the  latter  part  he  constantly  recurs  to  the 
prp-rious  thought.  The  former  part  is  a  sketch  of  the  downward  progress  of  the  hea- 
then world,  in  its  religiDus  life;  the  latter  describes  the  consequent  immorality, 


1:  19.]  ROMANS  I.  17 

19  who  ^  hold  down  *  the  truth  in  unrighteousness ;  be- 
cause that  which  may  be  known  of  God  is  manifest 

1  Or,  hold  the  truth.  *  For  hold  down  read  hinder. — Am.  Com. 

which  is  in  fact  a  revelation  of  God's  wrath.  (For  an  analysis  of  vers.  24-.32,  see 
under  ver.  24.)  The  Apostle  assumes  that  religion  and  morality  are  inseparably  con- 
nected; that  Grod  punishes  impiety  by  giving  up  the  impious  to  the  wrong  practices 
which  are  the  legitimate  fruit  of  their  ungodliness;  that  truth  and  right,  error  and 
wrong,  are  vitally  connected  in  human  e-vperience. 

Ver.  18.  For.  Direct  proof  of  ver.  17;  the  rigliteousne?s  from 
God  is  revealed  by  faiih,  for  other  revelations  are  of  God's  wrath. 
(See  note  above.) — The  wrath  of  God.  The  article  is  wanting 
here,  as  in  vers.  16,  17;  but  the  translation  'a  wrath  of  God'  (R.  V. 
marg.),  is  altogether  unnecessary.  This  phrase  is  anthropopathic 
{i.  e.,  borrowed  from  human  feelings) ;  but  it  expresses  a  reality, 
namely,  the  punitive  justice  and  holiness  of  God  over  against  sin. 
Yet,  this  wrath  of  God,  so  frequently  spoken  of,  must  not  be  con- 
founded with  its  result,  the  punishment  of  sin  ;  it  is  rather  '  an  affec- 
tion of  the  personal  God,  having  a  necessary  connection  with  His  love. 
The  wrath  of  God,  the  reality  of  which  is  indisputable  as  the  very 
presupposition  of  the  work  of  atonement,  is  the  love  of  the  holy  God 
(who  is  neither  neutral  nor  one-sided  in  His  affection)  for  all  that  is 
good  in  its  energy  as  antagonistic  to  all  that  is  evil'  (Meyer). — Is 
revealed.  The  continuous  revelation  is  indicated.  It  is  not  neces- 
sary to  assume  that  such  a  revelation  is  exclusively  supernatural, 
especially  here  where  historical  facts  exemplify  the  mode  of  the  reve- 
lation. Hence  the  revelation  is  an  outward  one,  not  that  accomplished 
through  the  gospel. — From  heaven  ;  to  be  joined  with  'revealed.' 
*  Heaven,'  as  the  dwelling-place  or  throne  of  God,  is  designated  as  the 
place  from  which  this  revelation  of  wrath  proceeds. — Against  all 
ungodliness  and  unrighteousness.  God's  wrath  is  against  every 
form  of  irreligiousness  and  immorality;  the  two  words  distinguishing 
sin  with  respect  to  God  and  the  law  of  rigl)t  He  has  established.  '  Un- 
godliness is  more  the  fountain  (but  at  the  same  time  partially  the 
result)  of  unrighteousness — which  unrighteousness  is  more  the  result 
(but  at  the  same  time  partially  the  fountain)  of  ungodliness '  (Alford). 
Hence  the  terms  are  not  to  be  apflied  respectively  to  sins  against  God 
and  against  men.— Of  men.  The  reference  is  not  now  to  all  men, 
but  to  those  'who  hinder,'  etc.  Since  the  Apostle  does  not  charge  the 
Jews  with  this  in  chap.  2,  the  Gentiles  ara  meant  here. — Hold  down 
(hinder,  Am.  Com.),  restrain,  or  hold  back,  rather  than  hold;  those 
who  hinder  the  truth  from  producing  its  proper  results. — Unright- 
eousness is  that  wherein  they  hold  the  truth  back,  hindering  it 
thereby. 

Ver.  19.  Because.  Here  begins  the  statement  why  God's  wrath 
was  revealed,  which  is  also  a  proof  that  they  hold  back  the  truth  in 
unrighteousness.  If  they  did  so  out  of  ignorance,  they  would  be  ex- 
2 


18  ROMANS  I.  [1:  20,21. 

20  in  them  ;  for  God  manifested  it  unto  them.  For  the 
invisible  things  of  him  since  the  creation  of  the  world 
are  clearly  seen,  being  perceived  through  the  things 
that  are  made,  even  his  everlasting  power  and  divi- 

21  nity  ;  ^  that  they  may  be  without  excuse  :  because  that, 
knowing  God,  they  glorified  him  not  as  God,  neither 

1  Or,  so  that  they  are. 

cusable;  but  they  do  not  do  so  out  of  ignorance,  and  therefore  God's 
wrath  is  manifested  against  them'  (Meyer).  The  Apostle  proves  first 
that  men  had  the  truth  (vers.  19,  20)  ;  then  that  they  hindered  it, 
and  perverted  it  (vers.  21-23).  Afterwards  the  result  is  described. — 
That  ■which  may  be  kno"wn  of  God.  *  Is  known '  would  be 
more  correct.  To  explain  the  phrase  as  meaning  the  knowledge  of 
God  is  ungrammatical,  while  the  rendering  'may  be  known'  (Origen, 
Beza,  Calvin,  Weiss,  and  many  others)  is  illogical  in  this  connection, 
since  it  is  plainly  shown  that  the  heathen  did  not  know  all  that  may 
be  known  of  God.—  In  them;  not,  '  among  them,'  which  would  refer 
to  a  merely  external  revelation.  The  Apostle  is  speaking  of  a  revela- 
tion in  the  heart  and  conscience. — God  manifested  it.  Through 
the  creation  (ver.  20).     The  tense  used  points  to  one  act. 

Ver.  20.  For  the  invisible  things  of  him.  Some  of  His  attri- 
butes, as  explained  afterwards. — Since  the  creation  of  the 
•world.  '  From,'  while  literally  correct,  may  be  misunderstood  as 
referring  to  the  means  of  clearly  seeing.— Being  perceived,  etc. 
The  mode  of  clearly  seeing  the  invisible  attributes  of  God  is  the  per- 
ception of  them  through  the  visible  things  which  He  has  made.— 
Even  his  everlasting  power  and  divinity.  The  word  '  ever- 
lasting' here  is  not  the  same  as  that  usually  rendered  'eternal';  it 
belongs  to  both  nouns.  '  Eternal  and  Almighty  have  always  been 
recognized  epithets  of  the  Creator'  (Alfordj.  Through  the 'power' 
men  recognize  the  '  divinity,'  which  here  means  not  the  personal 
Deity,  hni  the  sum  of  the  divine  attributes.  The  position  Taul  takes 
is  opposed  to  Pantheism  — That  they  may  be  without  excuse. 
The  designed  result  is  here  set  forth;  'so  that'  (R.  V.  marg.)  is  not 
literally  exact.  But  man's  inexcusableness,  not  God's  sovereignty,  is 
under  discussion. 

Ver.  21.  Because.  The  fact  which  renders  them  inexcusable  is 
now  stated.— Knowing  God  they  glorified  him  not  as  God. 
What  worship  they  rendered  was  not  in  accordance  with  the  know- 
ledge they  had  (ver.  20).  'Glorify'  refers  to  praising  God  for  what 
He  is. — Neither  gave  thanks ;  i.  e.  did  not  praise  Him  for  all  His 
benefits. — Became  vain  in  their  reasonings.  '  Imaginations  ' 
(A.  V.)  is  inexact;  the  R.  V.  usually  renders  the  term  'reasonings;' 
comp.  chap.  2:  15.  'Vanity'  is  a  characteristic  term  for  idol-wor- 
ship;   Deut.  22:  21;    2  Kings   17:  6;    Jer.   2:5;    Acts  14:  15.— 


i:  22-24.]  ROMANS  I.  19 

gave  thanks  ;    but  became  vain  in  their  reasonings, 

22  and  their  senseless   heart  was  darkened.     Profassing 

23  themselves  to  be  wise,  they  became  fools,  and  changed 
the  glory  of  the  incorruptible  God  for  the  likeness  of 
an  image  of  corruptible  man,  and  of  birds,  and  four- 
footed  beasts,  and  creeping  things. 

24  Wherefore  God  gave  them  up  in  the  lusts  of  their 
hearts  unto  uncleanness,  that  their  bodias  should  be 

Senseless,  or,  '  without  understanding,'  as  the  word  is  translated 
in  ver.  81. — Heart.  Here,  as  so  often  in  the  Bible,  this  refers  to  the 
whole  inner  man.— Was  darkened.  (Comp.  Eph.  4  :  18.)  This  is 
the  culmination  of  the  process :  not  worshipping  and  thanking 
God,  although  they  knew  Him,  they  became  vain  in  their  reasonings ; 
this  made  their  heart  senseless,  and  thus  it  was  darkened,  deprived 
of  the  truth  which  it  might  have  had  (formerly  had)  from  the  light  of 
nature. 

Ver.  22.  Professing  themselves  to  be  wise.  While  (not, 
because)  they  professed  themselves  to  be  wise.  This  has  reference, 
not  to  heathen  philosophers,  hut  to  the  conceit  of  wisdom  which  lay 
back  of  heathenism  itself. — They  became  fools.  '  It  is  not  merely 
that  they  expose  their  real  folly,  but  that  folly  is  itself  judicially 
inflicted  by  God  as  a  punishment  for  the  first  step  of  declension  from 
Him.'  (Sanday.)  Their  folly  was  manifested  in  their  idolatry. 
*  For  heathenism  is  not  the  primeval  religion,  from  which  man  might 
gradually  have  risen  to  the  knowledge  of  the  true  God,  but  is, on  the 
contrai-y,  the  result  of  a  falling  away  from  the  known  original  reve- 
lation of  the  true  God  in  His  works.'      (Meyer.) 

Yer.  23.  And  changed.  Comp.  the  strikingly  similar  passage, 
Vs.  lOG  :  20.  'Exchanged'  is  the  meaning,  as  in  ver.  2-3,  where, 
however,  a  stronger  word  is  used. — The  glory,  etc.  God's  majesty, 
perfection,  etc.,  made  known  as  stated  in  vers.  19-21. — Incorrup- 
tible ;  introduced  to  mark  the  folly  of  the  exchange. — For  the 
(lit.,  '  a ')  likeness  of  an  image.  This  expression  refers  both  to 
t.ie  grosser  and  the  more  refined  form  of  idolatry ;  common  people 
saw  in  ihe  idols  the  gods  themselves  ;  the  cultivated  heathen  regarded 
them  as  symbolical  representations,  etc. — Of  corruptible  man  ; 
so  the  Greeks  universally. — Of  birds,  etc.  The  Egyptians  wor- 
shipped idols  of  varied  bestial  forms,  and  in  Rome  this  worship 
prevailed  extensively.  The  order  marks  a  descent  to  the  lowest  kind 
of  idolatrous  representation ;  even  the  images  of  creeping  things 
were  worshipped. 

Ver.  24.  "Wherefore.  Having  shown  that  the  heathen  had  the 
truth  and  held  it  back  in  unrighteousness,  the  Apostle  now  shows 
hoiv  God's  wrath  was  displayed:  generally  in  giving  them  up  to  un- 
cleanness (vers.  24,  25),  and  specially  to  unnatural  sensuality  (vers. 


20  ROMANS  I.  [1 :  25,  26. 

25  dishonoured  among  themselves :  for  that  they  ex- 
changed the  truth  of  God  for  a  lie,  and  worshipped 
and  served  the  creature  rather  than  the  Creator,  who 
is  blessed  ^for  ever.     Amen. 

26  For  this  cause  God  gave  them  up  unto  ^vile  pas- 

1  Gr.  unto  the  ages.  2  Gr.  passions  of  dishonour. 

20,  27),  as  well  as  to  other  vices  which  are  named  (vers.  28-32). — 
Gave  them  up.  This  is  more  than  'permitted.'  'The  deep  shame 
of  the  heathen  is  a  divinely  ordained  result  of  their  idolatry'  (Beet). 
That  sin  is  punished  by  sin,  we  are  taught  by  the  Bible  and  by  daily 
experience.  God  abandons  man  to  the  consequence  of  his  own  doings, 
and  thus  punishes  him.  This  divinely  instituted  law  is  in  perfect 
harmony  with  our  personal  freedom  and  nioral  accountability. — In 
the  lusts  of  their  hearts.  Not  '  through,'  but  '  in,'  signifying  the 
moral  sphere  in  which  they  were,  when  the  judicial  abandonment  by 
God  delivered  them  over  to  a  still  worse  condition. — Unto  unclean- 
ness;  either  impurity  in  general  (Weiss),  or  unchastity  in  particular 
(Meyer).  The  heathen  scarcely  recognized  lewdness  as  sinful. — That 
their  bodies  should  be  dishonoured.  This  may  mean  either  the 
purpose  or  wherein  the  uncleanness  consisted  Meyer  prefers  the 
latter, — Among  themselves.  The  better  supported  reading  is 
Mhem;'   which,  however,  implies  the  sense,  'themselves.' 

Ver.  25.  For  that,  or,  more  fully  expressed,  '  since  they  were  such 
as.'  Here  the  Apostle  reverts  to  the  reason  for  the  punishment.— 
Exchanged.  A  stronger  phrase  than  that  in  ver.  28. — The  truth 
of  God.  The  truth  or  reality  of  God,  the  true  Divine  essence,  prac- 
tically the  same  as  '  the  true  God.'  The  latter  phrase  would  perhaps 
seem  irreverent.  Other  views,  the  true  knowledge  of  God,  the  true 
notion  of  God,  etc.,  are  less  in  keeping  with  the  figure  of  exchanging. 
—  For  a  lie;  comp.  Jer.  13:  25,  and  similar  passages,  where  idols 
are  called  a  'lie.'  I'he  term  is  apt,  because  the  heathen  gods  have  no 
existence. — "Worshipped  and  served.  The  former  means  religious 
reverence  of  every  kind ;  the  latter,  formal  worship,  with  sacrifice, 
and  other  acts  and  rites. — Rather  than  the  Creator.  The  nature 
of  the  case  leads  us  to  prefer  'rather  than'  to  'more  than ;'  for  idola- 
try is  incompatible  with  the  worship  of  the  ti'ue  God,  who  shares  His 
honor  with  none  of  His  creatures — "Who  is  blessed,  etc.  The 
doxology  is  the  natural  outburst  of  piety  aroused  into  holy  indignation 
at  the  sin  of  idolatry,  which  is  by  the  contrast  poTtrayed  in  its  darkest 
c  tlors.  The  word  rendered  'blessed'  is  applied,  in  the  Bible,  only 
to  Hod  ;  a  different  one  is  tised  of  man,  in  the  Psalms,  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  etc. — Amen.  Comp.  chaps.  9:  5;  11:  33,  for  this  solemn, 
liturgical  close  of  a  doxology. 

Ver.  26,  For  this  cause ;  namely,  because  of  the  apostasy  described 
in  ver.  25,  But  as  that  repeats  in  another  form  the  thought  of  ver. 
23,  so  this  verse  takes  up  anew  the  thought  of  ver.  24.     The  unclean- 


1:  27-29]  ROMANS  I.  21 

sions  :  for  their  women  changed  the  natural  use  into 

27  that  Avhich  is  against  nature :  and  likewise  also  the 
men,  leaving  the  natural  use  of  the  women,  burned  in 
their  lust  one  towiird  another,  men  with  men  working 
unseemliness,  and  receiving  in  themselves  that  recom- 
pense of  their  error  which  was  due. 

28  And  even  as  they  ^refused  to  have  God  in  their 
knowledge,  God  gave  them  up  unto  a  reprobate  mind, 

29  to  do  those  things  which  are  not  fitting ;  being  filled 
with   all    unrighteousness,  wickedness,   covetousness, 

1  Gr.  did  not  approve. 

ness  to  which  the  heathen  were  given  up  took  a  special  and  aggravated 
form ;  as  vile  passions,  lit,,  '  passions  of  dishonor.'  These  are 
truthfully  described,  and  yet  with  modest  reticence. — Women  ;  lit., 
'females.'  Abundant  evidence  of  such  unnatural  crime  is  found  in 
heathen  writers. 

Ver.  27.  The  men  ;  lit.,  'males.'  The  vice  of  sodomy  was  very 
prevalent  in  the  ancient  world.  The  description  here  is  more  intense, 
corresponding  with  the  prevalence  and  intensity  of  the  immorality. — 
Unseemliness,  lit.,  '  the  unseemliness,'  already  hinted  in  the  first 
half  of  the  verse  (Weiss).— Receiving  in  themselves;  in  their 
own  persons. — That  recompense  of  their  error.  The  unnatural 
lusts  and  vices  were  the  recompense,  the  due  punishment,  of  their 
'error,'  namely,  their  departure  from  God  into  idolatry. 

Ver.  28.  And  even  as.  This  is  not  equivalent  to  '  because,'  but 
marks  the  correspondence  between  the  sin  and  its  punishment. — 
Having  chosen  out  the  most  glaring  form  of  vice,  the  Apostle  enume- 
rates others  which  formed  part  of  the  punishment.  Here,  as  through- 
out, he  reverts  to  the  reason  they  were  given  over,  thus  emphasizing 
anew  the  connection  between  religion  and  morality. — They  refused, 
etc.,  did  not  deem  it  worth  while;  the  original  makes  'Cod'  the  ob- 
ject; did  not  deem  God  worthy  to  have  in  knowledge. — Unto  a 
reprobate  mind.  'Refused'  and  'reprobate'  represent  words  that 
sound  alike;  but  the  play  on  the  woi'ds  cannot  be  readily  reproduced. 
'Reprobate'  means  rejected  of  God  as  unworthy.  The  heathen  were 
not  deprived  of  the  faculty  of  distinguishing  between  right  and  wrong; 
but  they  practiced  evil,  and  encouraged  it  in  others  (ver.  32),  Be- 
cause 'they  knew  the  better  and  approved,'  their  guilt  was  the  greater 
when  they  'yet  the  worse  pursued,' — Which  are  not  fitting,  i.  e., 
indecent,  immoral;  what  these  things  were  is  detailed  in  vers.  29-31. 
The  Greek  negative  suggests  that  these  things  were  regarded  as  im- 
moral by  the  heathen  themselves. 

Ver,  29,  Being  filled  -with  all  unrighteousness.  This  is  a 
general    statement,  the  specifications   follow.     Similar  catalogues   of 


22  ROMANS  I.  [1:  30,  31. 

maliciousness  ;    full    of  envv,  murder,  strife,  deceit, 

30  malignity :  whisperers,  backbiters,   ^  hateful  to  God, 
insolent,  haughty,   boastful,  inventors  of  evil  things, 

31  disobedient  to  parents,  without  undei'stand ing,  cove- 
nant-breakers, without  natural  affection,  unmerciful : 

1  Or,  haters  of  God. 

sins  occur  several  times  in  the  New  Testament.  Various  ingenious 
attempts  have  been  made  at  classifying  tbis  list  ;  but  the  Apostle  seems 
to  have  had  in  mind  rhetorical  effect,  rather  than  systematic  order,  the 
design  being  to  bring  out  more  strikingly  the  absolute  need  of  redemp- 
tion. (The  word  'fornication'  is  omitted  by  the  best  authorities;  and 
after  vers.  26,  27,  the  naming  of  this  vice  seems  inappropriate.) — 
"Wickedness;  disposition  to  accomplish  evil;  the  adjective  is  ap- 
plied to  Satan. —  Covetousness  ;  this  sin  is  emphasized  in  the  New 
Testament  (See  especially  Eph.  5:  3,  5 ;  Col.  3:  5),  and  was  wide- 
spread, at  that  time,  in  the  Roman  world. — Maliciousness  in  the 
classical  sense  is  vileness  as  opposed  to  virtue. — Envy.  Conceived 
here  as  the  thought  which  has  filled  the  man. — Murder.  The  simi- 
larity in  sound  of  the  original  words  may  have  led  to  the  mention  of 
this  sin  first  here;  but  'envy  '  and  'murder'  are  related, — Strife. 
The  word  is  that  applied  to  the  goddess  of  Discord. — Whisperers  ; 
secret  slanderers,  tale-bearers.  (This  word  ought  to  be  placed  in  the 
next  verse.) 

Ver.  30.  Backbiters ;  open  slanderers,  or  calumniators. — Hate- 
ful to  God  ;  or  (so  A.  V.),  'haters  of  God.'  The  former  sense  is  the 
classical  one  ;  the  latter  is  supposed  to  be  more  in  accordance  with  the 
Biblical  view  of  God,  but  is  rejected  by  most  recent  commentators. 
'  Leaving  the  word  in  its  strict  significance  hatred  of  God,  we  recognize 
in  it  a  summary  judgment  of  moral  indignation  respecting  all  the  preceding 
particulars  ;  so.  that,  looking  back  on  these,  it  forms  a  resting-point  in 
the  disgraceful  catalogue'  (Meyer).  Alford  remarks:  'If  any  crime 
was  known  more  than  another,  as  "hatred  by  the  gods,"  it  was  that 
of  informers,  abandoned  persons  who  circumvented  and  ruined  others 
by  a  system  of  malignant  espionage  and  false  information.'-^Inso- 
lent,  haughty,  boastful ;  three  terms  applying  to  self-exaltation, 
the  last  the  least  offensive. — Disobedient  to  parents.  '  Apostasy 
from  the  piety  and  affection  due  to  parents  is  a  foundation  of  corrup- 
tion.    See  Mai.  4:6;  Luke  1  :   17'  (Lange). 

Ver.  ol.  In  this  verse  adjectives  take  the  place  of  the  substantives 
previously  used.  The  long  catalogue  is  thus  varied  — Without  un- 
derstanding ;  the  same  word  as  'senseless  '  (A.  V.  '  foolish  '  ),  ver. 
21. — Covenant-breakers.  In  the  original  there  is  another  play 
upon  the  sound  of  the  words.  (The  best  authorities  omit  '  implaca- 
ble.' ) — Unmerciful.  This  concludes  the  list,  marking  in  the  ab- 
sence of  the  least  principle  of  moral  action. 


1 :  32—2 :  1.]  ROMANS  II.  23 

32  who,  knowing  the  ordinance  of  God,  that  thev  which 
practise  such  things  are  worthy  of  death,  not  only  do 
the  same,  but  also  consent  with  them  that  practise 
them. 

Chapter  2  :  1-16. 
The  Ground  on  which  the  Jews  also  are  Condemned. 

1      Wherefore  thou  art  without  excuse,  O  man,  whoso- 
ever thou  art  that  judgest:  for  wherein  thou  judgest 

Ver.  32.  Who ;  or,  as  in  ver.  25,  '  being  such  as.'  This  verse 
adds  to  the  description  of  vices  a  deeper  degree  of  immorality  ;  show- 
ing how  entirely  the  heathen  are  '  without  excuse'  (ver.  20 ;  chap.  2: 
Ij. — Kno"wing.  A  stronger  word  than  in  ver.  21.  Their  conscience 
gave  such  knowledge. — Ordinance  of  God.  The  word  '  ordinance' 
is  derived  from  the  verb  meaning  to  justify,  and  means  a  justifying 
verdict  or  decree  ;  here  it  is  the  sentence  or  decree  of  God  as  Right- 
eous Lawgiver  and  Judge,  connecting  death  with  sin.  and  life  with 
righteousness,  as  recognized  in  the  conscience. — Practise.  This 
word  suggests  a  repetition  and  continuance  of  the  actions  — "Worthy 
of  death.  The  heathen  recognized  that  sin  must  be  punished,  and 
Paul  indicates  that  the  punishment  is  '  death,'  by  which  he  usually 
meant  (whatever  the  heathen  understood)  eternal  death.  There  is, 
however,  no  objection  to  understanding  it  more  generally. — Consent 
"With  them  that  practise  them.  This  is  the  sign  of  completed 
moral  abandonment;  they  fail  even  to  condemn  it  in  others.  It  is  al- 
most equivalent  to  saying,  '  evil,  be  thou  my  good.'  The  climax  of  the 
punishment  of  sin  by  sin  suggests  one  feature  of  the  eternal  death 
threatened  in  the  Bible.  This  dark  picture  of  heathen  corruption  is 
not  overdrawn,  though  honorable  exceptions  existed.  Not  all  heathen 
had  these  vices,  but  as  a  whole  the  description  is  correct.  It  can  be 
verified  by  testimony  from  the  classical  writers,  especially  from  Seneca 
and  Tacitus.  The  Apostle  '  was  writing  at  this  moment  from  Corinth, 
a  city  notorious  for  the  licentiousness  of  its  idol  worship,  and  we  can- 
not wonder  that  he  should  see  in  the  abominations  by  which  be  was 
surrounded  the  worst,  and  latest  development  of  evil '  (Sanday).  Deep 
moral  corruption  has,  it  is  true,  pervaded  Christendom.  But  there  re- 
mains this  radical  difference :  heathen  religion  produced  and  sanc- 
tioned heathen  corruptions  ;  Christendom  is  corrupt  in  spite  of  Chris- 
tianity. 

Chaptep^  2-3 :  20. 

2.   The  Sinfulness  of  the  Jews,  as  a  proof  of  their  Need  of  the  Gospel. 
This  passaare  contains  the  second  part  of  the  proof  of  the   universality  of  sin,  and 
hence  the  universal  need  of  the  gospel,  wherein  is  revealed  a  righteousness  from 


24  ROMANS  II.  [2:1. 

^another,  thou  condemnest    thyself:    for  thou    that 

iGr.  the  other. 

Gk)d  appropriated  by  faith.  It  begins  with  a  direct  address  to  one  who  is  not  named, 
but  characterized  as  a  Jew,  and  passes  to  a  direct  proof  of  the  guilt  of  the  Jews,  n'lt 
only  in  spite  of,  but  also  in  consequence  of,  their  greater  privilege,  concluding  with 
the  formal  declaration  that  no  one  can  be  justified  by  the  works  of  the  law 
(chap  3:  2U).  The  general  proof  of  the  sinfulness  of  the  Jews  is  found  in 
chap.  2,  while  3 :  1-20  presents  a  confirmation  from  the  Scriptures,  which  it  is  the 
privilege  of  the  Jew  to  possess.  For  convenience,  we  divide  chap  2  into  two  sec- 
tions :  the  first  (1)  setting  forth  the  grounds  of  God's  judgment  of  all  men  (vera 
1-lG) ;  the  second  (2)  applying  this  principle  to  the  case  of  the  Jews  (vers.  17-29), 
while  (3)  the  Scriptural  proof  of  their  guilt  is  presented  in  chap.  3  :  1-20. 

(1)   TTie  ground  on  which  the  Jews  also  are  condemned,  vers.  1-16. 

The  Jews  -would  at  once  assent  to  the  truthfulness  of  the  previous  description  ;  but 
■while  condemning  the  Gentiles,  they  would  mentally  excuse  themselves.  To  this 
natural  yet  improper  state  of  mind,  the  Apostle  replies.  He  shows  great  rhetorical 
skill,  both  in  the  use  of  direct  address,  and  iu  not  at  once  naming  the  Jews.  The 
truth  he  states,  and  which  he  uses  to  convict  the  Jews,  is  of  universiil  validity.  The 
rhetorical  form  only  enhances  the  logical  force  of  the  argument.  This  section  is,  in 
fact,  the  major  proposition  of  a  syllogism  :  All  who  judge  others  for  sins  they  them- 
selves commit,  are  under  God's  condemnation  (vers.  1-5) ;  for  God's  judgment  is  on 
moral  (not  national  or  ceremonial)  grounds  (vers.  6-11);  and,  moreover.  He  judges 
men  according  to  the  light  they  have  (vers.  12-16).  There  is,  throughout,  a  movement 
of  thought  towards  the  application  to  the  Jew,  whicli  is  expressed  in  vehement  form 
in  the  next  section ;  the  minor  proposition  being  found  in  vers.  17-20 :  the  Jew, 
having  more  light,  condemns  others  for  sins  he  himself  commits.  Tlie  second  para- 
graph of  this  section,  which  asserts  the  universal  principle  of  God's  judgment, 
contains  a  series  of  antithetic  parallelisms  (see  notes). 

Ver.  1.  "Wherefore.  This  refers  to  the  preceding  section  (vers. 
18-32),  especially  to  the  inexcusableness  of  the  heathen,  the  culmina- 
ting proof  of  which  is  found  in  ver.  32.— "Without  excuse  ;  as  in 
chap.  1 :  20. — O  man,  whosoever  thou  art,  etc.  The  application 
to  the  Jevrs  (ver.  17,  etc.)  shows  that  they  are  in  the  Apostle" s  mind  ; 
moreover  this  judgment  of  others  was  characteristic  of  the  Jews.  But 
what  he  says  is  true  of  everyone  '  whosoever' he  is  (see  above). — 
Wherein.  'In  the  matter  in  which.' — Another,  lit.,  'the  other;' 
as  it  is  rendered  in  1  Cor  10:  29.  AVe  would  use  '  thy  neighbor'  to 
express  the  thought,  but  the  Jew  would  not  call  a  Gentile  '  neighbor.' 
— Condemnest.  There  is  a  verbal  correspondence  in  the  original 
between  'judgest'  and  'condemnest.' — For  thou  that  judgest,  etc. 
This  is  the  proof  of  the  self-condemnation  :  for  the  judgment  pro- 
nounced upon  others  applies  to  the  man's  own  conduct.  There  is  a 
'reproachful  emphasis'  upon  thou  that  judgest. — Dost  practise. 
The  verb  is  the  same  as  in  chap.  1  :  32,  an(J  in  ver.  27  ;  both  it  and 
the  corresponding  noun  have  usually  a  bad  sense. — The  same  things. 


2:  2-4.1  ROMANS  11.  25 

2  judgest  doth  practise  the  same  things.  ^  And  we 
know  that  the  judgement  of  God  is  according  to  truth 

3  against  them  that  practise  such  things.  And  reckon- 
est  thou  this,  O  man,  who  judgest  them  that  practise 
such  things,  and  doest  the  same,  that  thou  shalt  escape 

4  the  judgement  of  God?  Or  despisest  thou  the  riches 
of  his  goodness  and  forbearance  and  long-suifering, 
not  knowing  that  the  goodness  of  God  leadeth  thee  to 

1  Many  ancient  authorities  read  For. 

Not  the  same  deeds,  but  of  the  same  moral  quality.  The  censorious 
spirit  is  of  the  same  sinful  character  as  vice ;  the  most  moral  men 
have  sinful  natures,  and  are  kept  from  open  transgression  only  by  the 
grace  of  God,  or  by  a  pride  which  is  no  less  sinful  than  vice. 

Ver.  2.  And  "wre  know.  Two  very  ancient  manuscripts  read 
'for';  but  this  was^ likely  to  have  been  an  alteration.  Paul  thus  in- 
troduces what  he  regards  and  what  his  readers  regard  as  an  un- 
doubted truth.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  he  means  '  we 
Jews.' — According  to  truth.  This  belongs  to  the  verb 'is';  the 
judgment  of  God  is  according  to  truth,  and  hence  it  is  against  them 
that  practise  such  things. 

Ver.  3.  And  reckonest  thou,  etc.  There  is  a  slight  antithesis 
here  :  *  and  '  (although  this  is  the  case  that  God's  judgment  is  against, 
etc.)  dost  thou  reckon,  etc.,  have  this  opinion  or  fancy. — This, 
namely,  what  follows  the  description  of  the  man  addressed  :  that 
thou  shalt  escape  the  judgement  of  God  ?  This  seems  to  have 
been  the  Jewish  error;  according  to  ver.  2  such  escape  was  impos- 
sible. But  it  is  an  error  not  confined  to  the  Jews.  'The  sinner  can 
persuade  himself,  and  by  many  kinds  of  misconception  stupefy  him- 
self, so  as  to  believe  that  his  sins  will  go  unpunished.  (Tubingen 
Bible.)     Ah,  how  common  is  this  deception! 

Ver.  4.  Or  despisest  thou,  etc,  A  new  error.  '  The  fallacy 
against  which  the  Apostle  is  protesting  in  these  verses  is  not  yet  ex- 
tinct. The  goodness  of  God.  i.  e..  His  disposition  to  promote  the  hap- 
piness of  His  creatures,  is  insisted  upon  as  if  it  were  unconditional, 
as  if  it  were  a  disposition  to  promote  their  happiness  simply  and  with- 
out any  reference  to  what  they  were  in  themselves'  (Sanday^ — 
Riches;  referring  to  abundance  or  magnitude;  a  favorite  expression 
with  the  Apostle,  especially  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians. — Good- 
ness: the  general  and  positive  term  (taken  up  again),  which  is  fur- 
ther explained  by  forbearance  and  long-suffering;  the  negative 
terms  referring  to  God's  tolerating  sin  and  withholding  punishtnent. 
— Not  knowing.  '  Inasmuch  as  you  do  not  know.'  Not  the  same 
•word  as  ver.  2.  Culpable  ignorance  ;  ignoring  the  fact  that  might  be 
known,  is  perhaps  implied. — Leadeth  (or,  'is  leading'}  thee  to 
repentance.    This  is  its  purpose  and  its  tendency;  but  it  is  thwarted 


26  ROMANS  II.  [2:  5-7. 

5  repentance?  but  after  thy  hardness  and  impenitent 
heart  treasurest  up  for  thyself  wrath  in  the  day  of 
wrath  and  revelation  of  the  righteous  judgement  of 

6  God ;  who  will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his 

7  works :  to  them  that  by  patience  in  well-doing  seek 
for  glory  and  honour  and  incorruption,  eternal  life ; 

by  man's  wilful  ignorance.  This  verse  is  a  question;  but  in  the  next 
verse,  which  is  so  closely  joined  with  it,  this  interrogative  form  is 
gradually  lost. 

Ver.  5.  But.  With  this  tendency  of  the  goodness  of  God  is  con- 
trasted the  conduct  of  man.  Instead  of  being  thereby  led  to  repent- 
ance, men  allow  themselves  to  fancy  that  God's  goodness  is  a  proof 
that  He  will  not  punish  sin. — After  thy  hardness  and  impeni- 
tent heart.  As  might  be  expected  from,  in  accordance  with  and 
occasioned  by,  thy  hardness,  etc. — Treasurest  up  for  thyself;  thou 
for  thyself,  not  God  for  thee.  'The  despising  of  the  riches  of  God's 
goodness  in  forbearance  and  long-suffering  is  the  heaping  up  of  a  trea- 
sure of  wrath'  (Lange).— In  the  day  of  wrath;  wrath  which  will  be 
revealed  in  the  day  of  wrath ;  '  against'  is  quite  incorrect. — And  reve- 
lation, etc.  This  qualifies  'day.'  God's  'righteous  judgment'  (one 
word  in  Greek)  will  not  be  fully  revealed  until  the  great  day  of  final 
judgment. 

Ver.  6.  "Who  "will  render,  etc.  This  is  the  universal  principle 
of  God's  judgment,  and  it  is  set  forth  in  detail  in  vers.  7-10,  which 
form  a  parallelism.  In  fact,  vers.  6  and  11  are  parallel:  vers.  7-10 
being  an  amplification  of  the  contrast  implied  in  both  of  these  verses. 
— Works.  This  is  the  word  so  frequently  used  by  Paul  in  this 
Epistle  and  in  Galatians.  Unfortunately  the  A.  V.  sometimes  (as  here) 
translates  it  '  deeds.'  Some  difficulty  has  been  raised  as  to  the  agree- 
ment of  this  principle  with  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  to 
which  such  emphasis  is  afterwards  given.  But  (1)  the  Apostle  is  ex- 
pounding the  law,  or  the  revelation  of  wrath  (chap.  1:  18  i,  not  the 
gospel,  (2)  Good  works  are  the  fruit  and  evidence  of  faith.  'The 
wicked  will  be  punished  on  account  of  their  works,  and  according  to 
their  works ;  the  righteous  will  be  rewarded,  not  on  account  of,  but 
according  to  their  works.  Good  works  are  to  theoi  the  evidence  of 
their  belonging  to  that  class  to  whom,  for  Christ's  sake,  eternal  life  is 
graciously  awarded  ;  and  they  are  in  some  sense,  and  to  some  extent, 
the  measure  of  that  reward'  (Hodge).  The  fact  that  the  Apostle,  in 
this  connection,  speaks  of  the  judgment  as  'according  to  my  gospel, 
through  Jesus  Christ,'  shews  that  he  was  not  aware  of  any  inconsis- 
tency between  the  two  principles. 

A'^ers.  7-10.  The  parallelism  will  appear  from  the  following  arrange- 
ment:— 

CTo  them  that  by  patience  in  well-doing 
^     <      Seek  fur  Klorv  and  houor  and  iuccrruption, 
1  Eternal  life: 


2 :  8, 9.]  ROMANS  II.  27 

8  but  unto  them  that  are   factious,  and   obey  not  the 

9  truth,  but  obey  unrighteousness,  shall  he  wrath  and 
indignation,  tribulation  and  anguish,  upon  every  soul 

{But  tinto  them  that  are  factious, 
And  obey  not  the  tiuth,  but  obev  unrighteousnesg. 
Shall  lie  wrath  and  indignation. 


(Oft 


Tribulation  and  anguish, 
pen  everj-  ^o\i\  of  man  that  worketh  evil, 
the  Jew  first,  aud  also  of  the  Greek; 


{But  glory  and  honor  and  peace, 
To  every  mm  that  worketh  good, 
To  the  Jew  first,  and  alsj  to  the  Greek. 

Tlie  first  and  fourth,  second  and  third  stanzas  are  respectively 
parallel;  but  the  lines  in  the  first  and  second  give  (1)  the  character, 
(2)  the  pursuits,  and  (3i  the  reward  of  the  opposite  classes.  The  third 
and  fourth  stanzas  reverse  this  order. 

Ver.  7.  By  patience,  or,  better,  perseverance,  steadfastness. 
The  preposition  in  the  original  points  to  the  standard  according  to 
■which  the  action  is  performed. — In  •well-doing,  or,  'good  work.' 
The  substantive  is  the  same  as  in  ver.  6:  here  to  express  the  character 
as  a  unit.  The  whole  phrase  qualifies  the  verb. — Seek  for  glory 
and  honour  and  incorruption.  Future  salvation  is  thus  described 
as  the  object  of  pursuit  :  it  is  '  gloi-y,'  because  of  its  splendid  manifes- 
taiion  ;  'honor,'  because  it  is  a  reward  ;  '  incorruption.' because  it  is 
eternal.  Whether  any  who  are  not  Christians  have  thus  sought,  is 
not  declared  by  the  Apostle ;  comp,  ver.  14. — Eternal  life.  This  is 
what  God  will  render  to  the  class  just  spoken  of.  The  phrase  is  dis- 
tinctively Christian. 

Ver.  8.  Unto  them  that  are  factious;  lit.,  'of  faction.'  The 
word  is  derived  from  one  meaning  to  work  for  hire,  and  in  the  New 
Testament  always  means  factiousness,  venal  partisanship ;  here  it 
refers  to  those  who  are  intriguing,  selfishly  serving  a  party,  and  not 
the  truth. — Obey  not  the  truth.  'The  truth'  and  'unrighteous- 
ness '  are  directly  opposed  to  each  other  by  the  Apostle. — "Wrath 
and  indignation.  This  is  the  better  supported  order.  '  Wrath  ' 
points  to  the  permanent  attitude  of  a  holy  God  toward  sin  ;  '  indig- 
nation,' to  its  particular  manifestation,  at  the  judgment.  •  Shall  be, 
is  supplied  to  reproduce  the  change  of  construction  in  the  original ; 
a  delicate  adjustment  to  indicate  that,  while  God  is  directly  the  giver 
of  eternal  life,  the  punishment  of  sin  is  the  necessary  result  of  the 
sinner's  own  conduct,  even  though  God  punishes.  Comp.  a  similar 
change  in  chap.  9  :  22,  23. 

Yer.  9.  Tribulation  and  anguish.  The  parallelism  is  con- 
tinued in  reverse  order.  '  Tribulation  '  refers  to  the  external  weight 
of  aflliction  :  'anguish'  to  the  internal  sense  of  its  weight,  or  to 
the  impossibility  of  escaping  from  it.     Beet  renders  the  latter  word 


Sa  ROMANS  II.  [2:  10-12. 

of  man  that  worketh  evil,  of  the  Jew  first,  and  also 

10  of  the   Greek  ;  but  glory  and  honour  and  peace  to 
every  man  that  worketh  good,  to  the  Jew  first,  and 

11  also  to  the  Greek ;  for  there  is  no  respect  of  persons 

12  with  God.  For  as  many  as  have  sinned  *  without  law 

*  Gr.  sinned. — Am.  Com. 

'  helplessness.'  In  any  case  it  forms  the  climax. — Every  soul  of 
man.  An  emphatic  and  solemn  way  of  saying  '  every  man  '  (comp. 
chap.  13  :  1),  but  possibly  implying  that  it  is  the  '  soul '  which  feels 
the  pain.  That  the  body  may  not  share  in  the  punishment  is  not 
stated,  here  or  elsewhere.  —Worketh  evil,  or,  '  is  working  out.'  The 
article  is  fouad  in  the  original  ('the  evil,'  'the  good').  The  verb, 
which  means  to  work  out,  to  accomplish,  is  stronger  than  the 
simple  verb  which  occurs  in  ver.  10  ;  but  in  both  cases  habitual  action 
is  indicated. — Of  the  Jew  first.  First  in  privilege,  the  Jew  be- 
comes first  in  responsibility  ;  comp.  chap.  1  :  16.  It  now  becomes 
evident  that  this  chapter  refers  especially  to  the  Jews. — Of  the 
Greek;  comp.  chap.  1  :  16  ;  where  the  term,  as  here,  is  equivalent 
to  'Gentile'  (so  incorrectly  rendered  in  A.  V.). 

Ver.  10.  Glory  and  honour  and  peace.  (Comp.  ver.  7.)  *  Peace' 
is  here  used  in  its  fullest  sense  ;  in  the  Old  Testament  it  includes 
'  peace,  plenty,  and  prosperity,'  but  with  more  of  a  temporal  refer- 
ence than  its  New  Testament  use.  Comp.  chap.  8 :  6,  and  similar 
passages 

Ver  11.  For  there  is  no  respect,  etc.  This  is  not  a  mere 
repetition  of  ver.  6 ;  but  gives  the  'reason  God  must  judge  the 
Jew  Jirst.  The  verse,  therefore,  constitutes  a  proper  transition  to 
the  next  pai-agraph  (vers.  12-16),  which  sets  forth  that  God's  judg- 
ment is  according  to  light  The  phrase  '  respect  of  persons  '  is  repre- 
sented in  the  oi'iginal  by  one  word.  The  conception  is  from  the 
Hebrew  (to  lift  up,  or  accept,  the  face),  and  in  the  New  Testament  is 
always  used  in  a  bad  sense  of  unjust  partiality.  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment it  sometimes  has  a  good  sense. 

Ver.  12.  For.  This  introduces  an  explanation,  namely,  since  God 
is  no  respecter  of  persons,  it  follows  that  He  will  judge  according  to 
light.  — As  many  as  have  sinned -without  la-w.  The  marginal 
note  of  the  Am.  Revisers  shows  that  '  have  sinned  '  is  not  a  literal  ren- 
dering. '  Without  law '  is  a  single  adverb  in  the  original,  and  refers 
to  the  absence  of  the  Mosaic  law  as  a  standard  of  morals,  since  the 
Gentiles  were  not  absolutely  without  law  (comp.  vers.  14,  15).  The 
next  clause  also  refers  to  the  Mosaic  law,  although  both  here  and  in 
ver.  13  the  article  is  wanting  in  the  original.  The  word  'law  '  in  this 
definite  sense  was  so  common  among  the  Greek-speaking  Jews  that 
they  treated  it  as  a  proper  name,  and  frequently  omitted  the  article. 
Many  recent  English  Commentators  claim  that  *  law '  without  the 
article  means   abstract  law,    and  '  the  law '  the  Mosaic  law,   or  that 


2:  13.]  ROMANS  II.  29 

shall  also  perish  without  law  ;  and  as  many  as  have 
13  sinned  *  under  law  shall  be  judged  by  law;  for  not 

*Gr.  sinned. — Am.  Com. 

the  word  '  law  '  refers  to  the  general  principle  '  do  this  and  live ; ' 
the  words  '  the  law '  to  '  the  historical  and  literary  form  in  which  A 
this  principle  took  shape  in  the  ears  and  eyes  and  thoughts  of  the  '" 
Jews  '  (Beet).  Yet  the  presence  or  absence  of  the  article  does  not  in 
Paul'^  usage  necessarily  indicate  even  this  distinction. — Also  per- 
ish. '  Also  '  points  to  the  correspondence  between  sinning  and  per- 
ishing ;  the  latter  is  the  opposite  of  salvation,  and  does  not  mean 
annihilation. — Under  law  :  lit.,  'in  law,'  in  that  condition,  not  sim- 
ply in  possession  of  it. — Shall  be  judged  by  law.  The  .Jews 
'are  to  be  judged  by  means  of  the  hno,  so  that  sentence  shall  be  passed 
upon  them  in  virtue  of  it.  See  Deut.  27:  26;  comp.  John  5:  45' 
(Meyer).  It  is  evident  that  any  other  reference  than  to  the  Mosaic 
law  makes  the  passage  very  flat.  The  verse  teaches  that  the  im- 
moral heathen  will  not  be  punished,  however,  with  the  rigor  of  the 
written  law,  as  in  the  case  of  disobedient  Jews  and  unfaithful  Chris- 
tians, but  according  to  their  light.  The  unfaithful  Christians  will 
be  judged  more  severely  than  the- disobedient  Jews,  and  the  dis- 
obedient Jews  than  the  immoral  Gentiles.  The  last,  however,  will 
not  go  unpunished,  since  they  are  without  excuse  (chap.  1  :  20  ;  vers. 
14-15). 

Yer.  13.  For.  This  introduces  the  proof  of  the  latter  part  of  ver. 
12.  The  parenthesis  of  tiie  A.  Y.  is  hot  only  unnecessary,  but  mis- 
leading; for  it  improperly  connects  ver.  16  with  ver.  12,  and  places 
the  important  proof  of  this  verse  in  a  subordinate  position  (see  under 
vers.  14,  16).  The  Jewish  mistake  was  that  the  possession  of  the  law 
of  itself  gave  them  an  advantage  in  the  judgment.  They  practically 
denied  that  those  who  sinned  under  the  law  would  be  judged  by  the 
law.  Now  the  Apostle's  object  is  to  prove  the  Jews  guilty  before  God 
and  in  need  of  righteousness  by  faith  ;  this  verse,  therefore,  is  an  im- 
portant link  in  the  chain  of  his  reasoning,  and  not  a  parenthetical 
statement. — The  hearers  of  a  (the.  Am.  Com.)  law.  The  best 
authorities  omit  the  article  before  'law'  in  both  clauses;  but  the 
phrases  are  equivalent  to  'law-hearers  '  and  '  law-doers,'  evidently  re- 
ferring here  to  the  Mosaic  law,  however  correct  the  more  general  ap- 
plication may  be.  Compare  the  rendering  of  the  American  Company. 
— Are  just  before  God.  That  God's  verdict  is  meant,  so  that  'the 
righteous  before  God'  are  those  who  are  'justified,'  is  perfectly  clear 
from  the  whole  sweep  of  the  argument  — But  the  doers,  etc.  This 
form  of  the  general  principle  of  ver.  6  opposes  the  Jewish  error,  and 
it  is  not  at  all  in  opposition  to  the  principle  of  justification  by  faith, 
(see  in  ver.  6).  '  How  in  the  event  of  its  being  impossible  for  a  man 
to  be  a  true  "doer  of  the  law"  (3:  9  ff.)  faith  comes  in  and  furnishes 
a  "righteousness  by  fiiith,"  and  then  how  man,  by  means  of  the 
"newness  of  life"  (6:  4)  attained  through  faith,  must  and  can  fulfil 


30  ROMANS  II.  [2 :  14,  15. 

the    hearers  of  a    law  *    are  ^  just  before    God,    but 

14  the  doers  of  a  law  shall  be  ^justified:  forf  when 
Gentiles  which  have  no  X  law  do  by  nature  the  things 
of  the   law,  these,   having  no  §   law,  are  a  law  unto 

15  themselves ;  in  that  they  shew  the  work  of  the  law 

*  For  a  law  read  the  law. — Am.  Com. 
t  Enclose  vers.  14,  15  in  a  parenthesis. — Am.  Com. 
%  For  ichich  have  no  read  that  have  not  the. — Am.  Com. 
§  For  having  no  read  not  having  the. — Am.  Com. 
IQr,  righteous.  2  Or,  accounted  righteous. 

(8:  4)  the  law  fulfilled  by  Christ  ("the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life."  8: 
2),  were  topics  not  belonging  to  the  present  discussion'  (Meyer). — 
Shall  be  justified.  Hence  this  phrase  means,  'shall  be  accounted 
righteous.'  (See  Excursus  before  chap.  3:  21.)  It  is  especially  unfor- 
tunate here,  where  the  adjective  'righteous'  occurs,  that  we  have  no 
corresponding  verb  of  the  same  derivation,  to  express  the  sense  of 
'justify.'  This  is  the  theoretical  effect  of  law,  and  is  the  practical 
eifect  when  by  faith  one  is  made,  as  the  result  of  justification,  a  doer 
of  the  law.     (Comp.  note  on  ver.  6.) 

Ytr.  1-4.  For.  The  principle  of  ver.  13  is  now  applied,  so  far  as 
it  can  be,  to  the  Gentiles,  and  this  thought  is  parenthetical  (vers.  14, 
15) ;  ver.  16  being  connected  with  the  close  of  ver.  13.  The  American 
Company  prefer  to  insert  marks  of  parenthesis  in  the  text.  Here,  as  in 
the  previous  discussion,  the  theoretical  effect  of  law  is  set  forth.  The 
Gentiles  have  a  law  within  themselves,  which  is,  so  to  speak,  a  substi- 
tute for  the  Mosaic  law,  and  by  this  law  they  are  judged,  by  the  doing 
of  it,  not  by  the  hearing  of  it.  It  is  not  asserted  that  any  do  thus  at- 
tain to  justification ;  the  word  when  having  a  conditional  force. — 
Gentiles.  The  article  is  wanting;  the  expression  refers  to  those 
Gentiles  among  whom  the  supposed  case  occurs. — "Which  have  no 
law.  The  rendering  of  the  Am.  Com.  is  more  exact.  The  state  oi 
the  Gentiles  as  a  whole  is,  however,  described;  they  have  not  a  re- 
vealed law. — Do  by  nature,  independently  of  express  enactment ;  on 
this  the  emphasis  rests. — The  things  of  the  law.  This  points  to 
individual  requirements,  rather  than  to  the  keeping  of  the  whole  law. 
The  explanation:  'do  what  the  law  does,'  command,  convince,  Con- 
demn, etc.,  is  opposed  by  the  phrase  'doers  of  the  law'  (ver.  13). — 
Having  no  law,  etc.  More  exactly :  Not  having  the  law  (Am. 
Com.),  i.  e.,  since  they  do  not  have,  or,  though  they  do  not  have.  The 
former  is  preferable,  in  view  of  the  connection  of  thought.  Their 
moral  nature  supplies  for  them  the  place  of  the  revealed  law,  in  the 
case  supposed.  It  is  not  implied  that  the  place  of  the  Mosaic  law  ia 
thus  fully  supplied. 

Ver.  15.  In  that,  or,  'being  such  as.'  This  is  virtually  the  proof 
that  they  are  a  law  unto  themselves.— Shew  the  work  of  the  law. 
By  their  doing  of  it  show  what  is  the  work  of  the  law=the  sum  of 


2:  IC]  ROMANS  11.  31 

written  in  their  hearts,  their  conscience  bearing  wit- 
ness therewith,  and  their  Hiioughts  one  with  another 
16  accusing  or  else   excusing  them;  "*"  in  the  day  when 

1  Or,  reasonings. 

*  Add  marg.     Or,  tlieir  IhouglUs  accusing  or  eUe  excusing  them  one  with  aivAher. — 
A  in.  Com. 

'the  things  of  the  law'  (ver.  14).— "Written  in  their  hearts.  They 
show  that  this  work  of  the  law  is  written  in  their  hearts.  That  is,  the 
Gentiles,  in  the  case  assumed,  are  a  law  unto  themselves,  as  is  evident 
from  their  showing;  by  their  acts  that  what  the  law  enjoins  is  written 
in  their  hearts. — Their  conscience  bearing  witness  there-with. 
Their  conscience  adds  its  testimony  to  that  of  their  act;  'witnesses 
together  with.'  The  practical  proof  ('show,'  etc.)  is  confirmed  by 
this  internal  use. — Their  thoughts  one  vrith  another.  '  Mean- 
while' (A.  V.)  is  incorrect.  The  question  arises,  whether  'one  with 
another'  refers  to  '  thoughts '  or  to  the  persons  spoken  of.  The  latter 
view  (expressed  in  the  marginal  rendering  added  by  the  Am.  Com.) 
indicates  that  their  moral  judgments  upon  one  another  also  attest  that 
the  law  is  written  in  their  hearts.  The  former  view,  which  is  prefer- 
able, makes  the  whole  of  the  latter  part  of  the  verse  refer  to  the  moral 
process  which  takes  place  in  the  heart  of  man  after  a  good  or  bad  act: 
the  conscience  sits  in  judgment,  rendering  sentence  in  God's  name 
according  to  the  law;  the  'thoughts'  are  the  several  moral  reflections 
which  appear  as  witnesses  in  this  court  of  conscience. — Accusing 
or  else  excusing  them.  '  Even '  is  preferable  to  '  else,'  since  it  sug- 
gests that  the  conscience  finds  more  accusing  than  excusing  thoughts. 
It  is  also  true,  that  adverse  judgments  of  other  persons  are  more  com- 
mon; but  the  judgment  spoken  of  is,  more  probably,  that  of  a  man 
upon  his  own  acts  and  feelings.  'This  judicial  process,  which  takes 
place  here  in  every  man's  heart,  is  a  forerunner  of  the  great  judgment 
at  the  end  of  the  world'  (SchafF).  '  How  can  we  fail  to  admire  here 
both  that  fine  analysis  with  which  the  Apostle  reveals  in  the  heart  of 
the  Gentiles  a  true  hall  of  judgment,  where  are  heard  the  witnesses 
against  and  for  the  accused,  then  the  sentence  of  the  judge— and  that 
largeness  of  heart  with  which,  after  having  traced  so  repulsive  a  pic- 
ture of  the  moral  deformities  of  Gentile  life  (chap.  1),  he  brings  out 
here  in  a  manner  not  less  striking  the  indestructible  moral  elements 
of  which  that  life,  although  so  profoundly  debased,  offers  now  and 
then  the  unexceptionable  signs  '  (Godet). 

Ver.  IG.  In  the  day.  The  question  of  connection  is  the  important 
one.  Some  join  directly  with  ver.  1-5,  referrinsc  the  'day'  to  the  day 
when  the  gospel  is  preached  to  the  Gentiles,  and  the  demonstration  of 
vers.  14,  15,  is  made.  But  this  verse  seems  to  point  to  the  future  judg- 
ment. Most  commentators,  therefore,  look  for  the  connection  in  some 
more  appropriate  part  of  the  preceding  context.  The  A.  V.  joins  with 
ver.  12;  but  ver.  13  is  not  parenthetical  (see  ver.  \Z).     Vers.  14,  15, 


ROMANS  II.  [2:  17. 


God  ^  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men,  according  to  jny 
gospel,  by  Jesus  Christ. 

Chapter  2:  17-29. 
The  Jtw  is  Condemned ;  His  External  Circumcision  does 

not  Avail. 
17      But  if  thou  bearest  the  name  of  a  Jew,  and  restest 

1  Or,  judgeth. 

are,  however,  and  the  connection  with  ver.  13  ('the  doers  of  the  law 
shall  be  justified')  is  even  more  appropriate,  since  it  brings  the  dis- 
cussion closer  to  the  main  thought,  namely,  the  conviction  of  the  Jews. 
(Vers.  6  and  10,  which  have  been  suggested,  are  too  remote.)  Ihe 
attempt  to  preserve  the  cl<  se  connection  vith  ver.  15,  by  rendering  '  unto 
the  day,'  is  grammatically  objectionable. — Shall  judge.  A  change 
of  accent  permits  the  translation,  'judgeth  ;'  but  even  the  present 
tense  might  point  to  the  great  day  of  judgment. — The  secrets  of 
men.  In  order  to  justify  the  doers  of  the  law  (ver.  13),  the  moral 
quality  of  their  actions  must  be  determined  ;  this  is  not  known  to 
men,  it  belongs  to  the  secret  things.— According  to  my  gospel. 
This  cannot  refer  to  a  writing  called  Paul's  Gospel.  It  was  the  gospel 
he  preached,  'my'  pointing  either  to  the  fact  that  he  preached  it,  or 
to  his  special  message  to  the  Gentiles.  The  gospel  of  the  free  grace 
of  God  in  Christ  for  the  salvation  of  all  that  believe,  revealed  to  him 
directly  by  Christ  at  his  conversion  and  call  to  the  Apostleship  ;  comp. 
Gal.  1:  7-9,  11,  16.  'According  to'  may  refer  only  to  the  fact  or 
judgment,  which  his  gospel  declares;  but  this  seems  a  weak  thought 
in  this  connection.  Paul  was  so  assured  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel  he 
preached  that  he  conceives  of  it  as  presenting  the  standard  of  judg- 
ment in  the  great  day.  Nor  is  this  an  inappropriate  thought.  The 
principle  of  ver.  13,  it  is  thus  indicated,  accords  with  the  gospel;  fur- 
thermore, the  gospel  is  about  Jesus  Christ  (chap.  1:  3,  4),  and  the 
judgment  is  by  (lit.,  'through')  Jesus  Christ,  who  is  not  only 
Mediator  in  the  gospel,  but  Judge  in  the  great  '  day'  (comp.  Acts  17: 
30,  31);  and  many  similar  passages.  The  Saviour  is  Judge;  good 
news  for  those  who  accept  Him,  but  a  warning  to  those  who  refuse 
Him.  Since  He  is  the  Judge,  and  God  renders  'to  every  man  accord- 
ing to  his  works'  (ver.  6),  our  good  works  also  are  through  Jesus 
Christ,  and  His  salvation  must  result  in  such  works. 

(2)   The  Jew  is    Condemned;   His  External  Circumcision  does  not  Avail, 

vers.  17-29. 

This  section  con'ains  the  direct  application  to  the  case  of  the  Jew,  in  the  form  of  an 

indiffnant  outburst  (vers.    17-24),  much   of  the  vehemence  of  which   has  been  lost 

through  the  incorrect  reading  followed  in  the  A.V. ;  the  general  principle  is  thenap- 


2:  18,  19.]  ROMANS  II.  33 

18  upon  ^  the  law,  and  gloriest  in  God,  and  knowest  ^  his 
will,    and   ^  appro  vest  the  things  that  are    excellent, 

19  being  instructed  out  of  the  law,  and  art  confident  that 
thou  thyself  art  a  guide  of  the  blind,  a  light  of  them 

1  Or,  a  lave.  -  Or,  the  Wi'l. 

3  OT.provest  {doth  distinguish.— Am.  Com)  the  thiuys  tuat  differ. 

plied  to  circumcision  (vers.  25-29) ;  preparing  the  way  for  the  thought  of  chap.  3. 
The  stronghold  of  Jewish  pride  was  the  sign  of  circumcision,  and  a  reference  to  it 
could  not  well  be  omitted  in  this  rebuke  to  Jewish  pride.  Vers.  17-24  virtually  resume 
the  thought  of  vers.  1-3,  but  this  thought  had  been  enforced  in  the  intervening 
verses,  so  that  there  is  no  abrupt  change  of  subject.  (Vers.  17-20  form  the  minor 
proposition;  vers.  21-24  the  conclusion  of  the  syllogism  introduced  by  the  last  sec- 
tion.; iS'o  man  must  condemn  another,  for  the  judgment  is  on  moral  grounds  and  ac- 
cording to  light ;  (vers.  1-16) ;  the  Jew  condemns  others,  proud  of  his  religious 
privileges  (vers.  17-20);  which  but  makes  his  immorality  the  more  inexcusable  (vers. 
21-24),  and  there  is  no  escape  through  circumcision,  since  true  circumcision  is  of  the 
heart  (vers.  25-29). 

Yer.  17.  But  if.  The  addition  of  a  single  letter  in  the  Gr^ek 
gives  this  sense,  which  is  without  doubt  the  correct  one.  The  con- 
struction is  modified  by  the  change  ;  vers.  17-20  form  the  conditional 
part  of  the  sentence,  and  vers.  21-24  the  conclusion  in  the  form  of 
successive  questions  (but  see  on  ver.  23).  'If  is,  of  course,  rhetori- 
cal ;  there  could  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  position  and  feelings  of  the 
Jew. — Thou.  Emphatic,  as  the  original  indicates. — Bearest  the 
name  of.  'Art  called,'  is  incorrect,  '  art  named'  is  not  so  exact  as 
the  full  paraphrase  we  give. — A  Jew.  The  name  of  .Ji  dah  had  a  re- 
ligious sense,  and  the  title  of  'Jew'  was  regarded  as  highly  honorable^ 
The  title  of  '  Christian '  may  also  become  a  mere  title. — Restest 
upon  the  la-w.  The  article  is  omitted,  but  the  Mosaic  law  is,  of 
course,  meant.— Gloriest  in  God.  The  verb  may  be  rendered 
'boast'  or  'glory.'  The  former  word  suggests  a  false  glorying, 
arising  from  bigotry  and  conceit,  and  this  is  the  sense  here ;  but 
'glory'  preserves  the  correspondence  with  the  passage  where  the 
word  retains  its  good  sense. 

Ver.  18.  And  knowest  his  will;  lit.,  'the  Will,'  evidently 
God's  will,  as  revealed  in  the  law. — Approvest  the  things  that 
are  excellent;  or,  'dost  distinguish  the  things  that  diflFer.'  Both 
translations  are  verbally  exact,  the  latter  being  more  in  accordance 
with  usage.  But  it  gives  so  tame  a  sense  here,  in  this  glowing  rebuke, 
that  the  other  is  to  be  preferred.  'Provest'  (Eng.  Com.  marg.)  is 
inexact.— Being  instructed,  etc.  This  was  the  means  by  which 
the  will  of  God  was  known,  and  the  excellent  things  approved.  There 
is  reference  to  the  public  reading  and  exposition  of  the  law  in  the 
synagogue. 

Ver.  19.  And  art  confident.  Vers.  19,  20  set  forth  the  atti- 
tude of  the  Jew  toward  the  Gentile,  not  only  regarding  himself  as  su- 


34  ROMANS  II.  [2 :  23-22. 

20  that  are  in  darkness,  ^  a  corrector   of  the  foolish,   a 
teacher  of  babes,  having  in  the  law  the  form  of  know- 

21  ledge  and  of  the  truth ;  thou  therefore  that  teachest 
another,  teachest  thou  not  thyself?  thou  that  preachest 

22  a  ruan  should  not  steal,  dost  thou  steal  ?   thou  that 

1  Or,  an  instructor. 

perior,  but  condescending  to  make  proselytes.  This  attitude  grew  out 
of  the  facts  indicated  in  ver.  18,  as  is  suggested  by  the  connective  used 
in  the  Greek. — That  thou  thyself  art,  etc.  These  proud  designa- 
tions were  not  uncommon  among  the  .Jews,  who  deemed  the  Gentiles 
'  blind '  and  '  in  darkness.'  In  proselyting  they  presented  themselves 
as  'guides'  and  'lights.'  The  history  in  the  Acts  shows  how  they 
held  themselves  toward  the  Gentiles. 

Ver.  20.  A  corrector  of  the  foolish.  'Instructor'  (marg.)  is 
too  weak  ;  'corrector'  is  possibly  too  strong.  'Trainer'  is  the  exact 
sense. — A  teacher  of  babes.  These  figurative  expressions  cor- 
rectly represent  the  proud  attitude  of  the  Jews  as  religious  instructors. 
— Having  in  the  la"w.  The  change  of  order  gives  clearness.  This 
clause  gives,  in  eifect,  the  reason  of  the  Jewish  attitude  just  described. 
(The  article  is  here  used  with  '  law,'  because  the  whole  law  as  a  book 
is  spoken  of). — The  form  of  kno-wledge  and  of  the  truth.  Not 
the  'mere form'  (as  in  2  Tim.  3  :  5),  but  the  'very  form,'  the  exact 
model,  pattern,  representative.  Religious  knowledge  and  truth  had 
found  their  embodiment  and  expression  in  the  law.  Paul  honored  the 
law  (chap.  3  :  21,  31,  etc.),  and  would  not  speak  of  it  as  a  mere  ap- 
pearance. Further,  the  severe  rebuke  of  the  following  verses  implies 
actual,  not  seeming,  religious  privilege.  Because  the  Jew  had  such 
privileges,  his  sin  was  all  the  greater :  to  belong  to  the  true  church,  to 
hold  the  true  doctrine,  to  be  able  to  expound  it  to  others  should  make 
us  better  men  ;  but  when  these  things  are  joined  wtih  unholiness, 
they  but  add  to  our  condemnation.  At  the  close  of  the  verse  a  semi- 
colon has  been  properly  substituted  for  the  period  of  the  A.  V. 

Ver.  21.  Thcu  therefore.  '  Therefore'  sums  up  what  has  been 
previously  said.  '  Being  such  an  one,  to  thee,  I  say,'  etc.  The  ques- 
tion implies  surprise  at  such  a  state  of  things,  and  rebukes  it. — 
Teachest  thou  not  thyself?  This  is  the  general  accusation,  that 
the  conduct  of  the  Jew  did  not  agree  with  his  knowledge  and  assumed 
position,  set  forth  in  vers.  17-20.  The  specifications  follow,  with  a 
summing  up  of  the  result  in  ver.  23. — Dost  thou  steal  ?  In  this 
charge  there  is  probably  a  referenee  '  to  the  passionate  and  treacher- 
ous method  of  transacting  business  adopted  by  the  Jews  ;  Jas.  4  :  13.' 
(Lange.) 

Ver.  22.  Commit  adultery.  The  loose  practices  in  regard  to 
divorce  (Matt.  19  :  8-9)  amounted  to  this  sin,  and  the  Talmud  charges 
adultery   upon   some  of  the  most  celebrated    Rabbins. — Abhorrest 


2:23,24.]  ROMANS  II.  35 

sayest  a  man  should  not  commit  adulteiy^  dost  thou 
commit  adultery  ?  thou  that  abhorrest  idols,  dost  thou 

23  ^rob  temples  ?  *   thou  who  gloriest  in  ^the  law,  through 
thy  transgression  of  the  law  dishonourest  thou  God  ? 

24  for  the  name  of  God  is  blasphemed  among  the  Gen- 

1  Or  commit  sacrilege.  ^  Or  a  law. 

*  Omit  the  marg. — Am.  Com. 

idols.  The  noun  corresponding  to  the  verb  here  used  is  *  abomina- 
tion '  (Matt.  24;  15,  etc.;,  a  term  applied  to  idols. — Dost  thou  rob 
temples  ;  or,  as  in  the  A.  V.,  '  commit  sacrdege  ?'  The  passage  has 
occasioned  much  discussion.  '  Commit  sacrilege '  seems  to  stand  in  no 
necessary  connection  with  abhorring  idols,  whereas  the  robbing  of 
heathen  temples,  thus  making  pei'sonal  gain  of  the  '  abominations,' 
would  be  a  grievous  sin.  The  objection  that  the  Jews,  not  regarding 
the  idol  temples  as  sacred,  would  not  deem  it  a  special  sin  to  rob 
them,  does  not  seem  valid,  nor  can  the  crime  be  deemed  so  singular 
that  it  would  not  be  mentioned  here.  In  Deut.  7:  25  the  destruction 
of  graven  images  is  commanded,  but  the  rohbery  of  the  gold  and 
silver  on  tliem  is  strictly  forbidden  :  the  words  used  in  the  prohibi- 
tion in  the  LXX.  being  similar  to  '  abhor  '  here.  Various  less  literal 
interpretations  have  been  suggested :  Embezzlement  of  their  own 
temple  taxes,  etc.  ;  avarice,  even  robbing  God  by  seeking  salvation  by 
works  (Luther).  The  sense  we  advocate  implies  that  tLe  Jew  by 
making  gain  of  heathen  idol  worship  becomes  an  idolater.  There  is 
then  a  climax,  theft,  adultery,  idolatry, — three  sins  so  often  associated 
in  the  Scriptures  and  in  practice. 

Ver.  23.  Thou  who  gloriest  in.  Comp.  ver,  17.— Through  this 
(lit, 'the')  transgression  of  the  law,  dishonourest  thou  God  ? 
or,  '  thou  dishonorest  God.'  This  points  to  the  infraction  of  the  law  as 
a  whole,  rather  than  to  single  forms  of  transgression.  There  is  a  sum- 
ming up  of  the  charges  of  vers.  21-22.  It  is  difficult  to  decide  whether 
this  verse  is  a  question,  forming  a  climax  to  the  interrogative  charge, 
or  an  answer  given  by  I'aul  himself  to  his  own  questions,  vers.  21-22, 
The  sense  remains  substantially  the  same  whichever  construction  be 
accepted.  The  general  similarity  of  form  in  the  verses  favors  the 
usual  view,  but  a  slight  variation  in  the  original  is  urged  in  support 
of  the  affirmative  construction,  '  God '  is  dishonored  because  it 
is  His  law  which  they  transgress.  See  next  verse,  'Paul's  argument 
strikes  with  equal  force  against  all  conduct,  of  .Jews  or  Christians, 
which  is  inconsistent  with  profession,  and  which  brings  dishonor  to 
God'  (Beet). 

Ver.  24.  For  This  word  is  not  found  in  Is.  52 :  5,  the  passage 
here  quoted  (from  the  LXX),  Paul  inserts  it  to  show  that  he  has 
applied  the  language  in  his  own  way.  That  he  does  not  cite  it  as  a 
fulfilled  prophecy  appears  further  from  the  unusual  pjosition  of  '  as  it  is 
written,'  after  the  Old  Testament  words.  This  verse  confirms  the  state- 


36  ROMANS  II.  [2:  25. 

25  tiles  because  of  you,  even  as  it  is  written.  For  cir- 
cumcision indeed  profiteth,  if  thou  be  a  doer  of  the 
law :  but  if  thou  be  a  transgressor  of  the  law,  thy  cir- 

ment  of  ver.  23,  that  God  was  dishonored  through  the  transgression  of 
the  law  by  the  Jews,  and  is  appropriate,  whatever  view  be  taken  of  the 
construction  of  that  verse. — The  name  of  God,  etc.  The  original 
passsage  is  :  '  and  my  name  continually  every  day  is  blasphemed.'  The 
reference  was  to  the  dishonor  put  upon  God's  name  by  the  enslaving  of 
the  Jews:  but,  as  already  indicated,  Paul  applies  the  words  to  different 
circumstances.—  Among  the  Gentiles  because  of  you.  ('Through 
you  '  is  incorrect.)  The  LXX.  has  these  words,  though  the  order  is  dif- 
ferent from  that  of  the  Apostle's  language.  The  sense  of  the  verse  is 
plain  :  '  The  Gentiles  judged  the  religion  of  the  Jews  by  the  scandalous 
conduct  of  the  Jews  themselves,  and  were  thus  led  to  blaspheme  their 
God,  Jehovah.  The  Jews  boasted  of  the  law,  and  reflected  disgrace 
on  the  lawgiver '  (Lange).  For  the  Jews  were  'the  Gentiles'  Bible.'  It 
was  as  true  then  as  now,  that  'the  greatest  obstructors  of  the  success 
of  the  Word,  are  those  whose  bad  lives  contradict  their  good  doctrine' 
(Henry). — IJven  as  it  is  -written,  He  had  quoted  the  language  of 
the  Old  Testament,  but  not  in  its  historical  application.  Ezek,  86  :  23 
expresses  Paul's  thought:  '  I  will  sanctify  my  great  name,  which  was 
profaned  among  the  heathen,  which  ye  have  profaned  in  the  midst  of 
them.' 

Ver.  25.  For  circumcision.  The  statement  of  vers.  23,  24, 
•which  summed  up  the  charge  against  the  sinful  Jew,  is  now  corrobo- 
rated :  '  what  I  have  said  is  true  in  spite  of  circumcision,  for  circum- 
cision without  the  keeping  of  the  law  is  of  no  avail;  true  circumcision 
and  true  Judaism  are  not  outward  matters,  but  of  the  heart'  (vers. 
28,  29).  This  turn  of  thought  is  not  abrupt,  for  the  Jew  would  at 
once  answer  the  preceding  indictment  by  adducing  his  privilege  as 
one  circumcised.  The  naturalness  of  this  defence  appears  from  the 
constant  tendency  to  deal  in  the  same  manner  with  the  sacraments, 
and  means  of  gi-ace  in  general.  The  reference  here  is  to  the  actual 
rite,  which  was  a  sign  of  membership  in  the  people  of  God. — Indeed 
profiteth.  This  implies  that  the  Jew  would  say :  '  my  cii'cumcision 
profits  me,  even  if  I  am  guilty  as  you  charge.' — If  thou  be  a  doer 
of  the  law.  The  oricinal  points  the  constant  practice  to  habitual 
obedience  as  a  characteristic.  Circumcision  is  the  sign  and  seal  of  a 
covenant,  and  the  covenant  had  for  its  condition,  on  the  part  of  the 
Jew,  the  keeping  of  the  law  (Gen.  17:  1;  Lev.  18:  5;  Dtut.  27:  26; 
Gal.  5  :  3).  A  further  use  of  circumcision  is  pointed  out  in  chap.  4: 
n  ;  but  here  this  does  not  come  into  view.  Nor  is  perfect  obedience 
suggested  here,  but  rather  such  sincere  and  hearty  obedience,  as  the 
pious  Jew  could  and  did  render,  prompted  by  trust  in  Jehovah,  the 
covenant  God,  who  gave  blessings  and  promises  to  His  people. — Is 
become  uncircumcision.     '  Plas   lost,  for  thee,  every  advantage 


2  :  26,  27.]  ROMANS  11. 


26  cumcision  is  become  iincircumcision.  If  therefore  the 
uncircumcision  keep  the  ordinances  of  the  law,  shall 
not  his  uncircumcision  be  reckoned  for  cu'cumcision  ? 

27  and  shall  not  the  uncircumcision  which  is  by  nature, 
if  it  fulfil  the  law,  judge  thee,  who  with  the  letter 
and    circumcision,   art   a    transgressor   of   the   law? 

•which  it  was  de-igned  to  secure  to  thee  over  the  uncircumcised,  so 
that  thou  hast  now  no  advantage  over  the  latter,  and  art,  just  as  he 
is,  no  member  of  God's  people'  (Meyer).  The  unholy  Jew  virtually 
becomes  a  Gentile.  The  same  principle  applies  to  Christian  baptism, 
the  initiatory  rite  of  the  New  Dispensation;  it  avails  nothing  in  itself, 
but  becomes  a  ground  of  condemnation,  if  the  baptized  pei-son  violates 
the  duties  implied  in  the  covenant  of  which  it  is  the  sign  and  seal. 

Ver.  26.  If  therefore.  The  unholy  Jew  virtually  becomes  a  Gen- 
tile (ver.  25),  does  not  the  obedient  Gentile  virtually  become  a  Jew? 
— The  uncircumcision.  The  Jewish  expression  for  'the  uncir- 
cumcised;' comp.  Gdl.  2:  7.— Keep  the  ordinances  of  the  law. 
'  Righteousness '  is  misleading  hei'e ;  the  righteous  requii'ements  of 
the  law  are  meant  (comp.  chap.  1 :  32) ;  moral,  not  ceremonial,  for 
the  chief  ceremonial  observance,  circumcision,  is  necessarily  excluded. 
Complete  fulfilment  of  the  law  is  not  meant ;  nor  is  any  hint  given  as 
to  the  way  in  which  a  Gentile  could  '  keep  the  ordinances  of  the  law,' 
though,  as  Godet  thinks,  the  Apostle  px'obably  had  in  mind  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  ordinance  of  the  law  by  Gentile  Christians  (comp.  chap. 
8:  4),  not  proselytes  of  the  gate,  as  Philippi  suggests.— Shall  not. 
The  form  indicates  that  an  affirmative  answer  is  expected. — His  un- 
circumcision. 'His'  takes  up  the  concrete  idea  of  'uncircumcision' 
in  the  previous  clause. — Be  reckoned  for  circumcision.  The 
phrase  is  precisely  the  same  as  in  the  well-known  one :  *  reckoned  for 
righteousness'  (chap.  4:  3,  9,  22;  Gal.  3:  6),  except  that  here  the 
future  is  used,  probably  pointing  to  the  day  of  judgment.  At  that 
time  the  uncircumcised  Gentile,  who  has  kept  the  ordinances  of  the 
law,  shall  be  regarded  precisely  as  though  he  were  circumcised,  i.  e., 
as  a  member  of  God's  covenant  people. 

Ver.  27.  And  shall  not  the  uncircumcision.  As  in  ver.  23, 
the  main  question  here  is,  whether  the  verse  is  interrogative  or  affirm- 
ative. Here,  hoAvever,  the  original  is  more  decisively  in  favor  of  the 
affirmative  than  in  the  previous  instance.  We  would  then  render : 
'And  the  uncircumcision,'  etc.,  .  .  .  'shall  judge  thee,'  etc. — Which 
is  by  nature,  i.  e.,  the  Gentile;  'by  nature ''=by  natural  birth. — 
If  it  fulfil  the  law,  lit.,  '  fulfilling  the  law,"  but  it  introduces  the 
condition  more  fully  stated  in  ver.  26. — Shall  judge.  This  verb 
stands  in  emphatic  position.  (Comp.  Matt.  12:  41,  42,  and  similar 
passages.)  The  reference  is  not  to  the  direct,  but  to  the  indirect,  judg- 
ment of  the  last  day,  when  the  conduct  of  the  Gentile  will,  by  com- 


ROMANS  II.  [2 :  28,  29. 


28  For  he  is  not  a  Jew,  which  is  one  outwardly;  neither 
is  that  circumcision,  which  is  outward  in  the  flesh  : 

29  but  he  is  a  Jew,  which  is  one  inwardly  ;  and  circum- 

parison,  show  the  true  moral  attitude  of  the  sinning  Jew. — "Who 
■with  the  letter  and  circumcision,  etc.  'With'  refers  to  the 
circumstances  in  which  the  action  takes  place;  'here  according  to  the 
context:  in  spite  of  tvhich  the  transgression  takes  place'  (Meyev). 
'Letter'  points  to  the  law  as  written  by  God;  there  is  no  implied 
opposition  to  '  spirit.'  '  Ci)-cumcision '  points  to  the  covenant  obliga- 
tion of  the  Jew  to  keep  the  law.  Hence  the  aggravated  guilt  of  one 
who  in  such  circumstances  is  a  transgressor  of  this  law — for  that  the 
Mosaic  law  is  meant  is  plain  enough.  The  absence  of  the  article  here 
(in  the  original)  ought  to  be  conclusive  against  the  notion  that  Paul 
omits  the  article  only  when  he  means  'law'  in  general. 

Ver.  28.  For.  This  introduces  the  proof  of  the  previous  posi- 
tions, ver.  27. — He  is  not  a  Jew,  -which  is  one  outwardly. 
This  gives  the  sense  of  the  original ;  but  in  this  and  the  succeeding 
verse  the  construction  is  peculiar.  The  one  who  shows  only  the  out- 
ward marks  of  a  Jcav  is  not  a  true  Jew. — Which  is  outward.  The 
same  phrase  just  rendered  'outv/ardly.' — In  the  flesh.  This  is  a 
further  explanation  of  '  outward,'  and  is  to  be  taken  literally. 

Yer.  29.  "Which  is  one  inwardly  ;  in  his  secret  inner  life. — 
And  circumcision  is  that  of  the  heart,  etc.  The  A.  V.  pre- 
serves the  parallelism,  which  is  not  so  marked,  however,  in  the  origi- 
nal. The  difficult  construction  of  the  original  has  led  to  other  render- 
ings: '  And  circumcision  is  of  the  heart,'  etc.;  'And  circumcision  of 
the  heart  is  (resides,  rests)  in  the  spirit,'  etc.  The  sense  remains  sub- 
stantially the  same.  Circumcision  of  the  heart  is  demanded  in  the 
Old  Testament.  The  same  principle  applies  to  baptism,  the  sign  and 
seal  of  regeneration. — In  the  spirit,  not  in  the  letter.  The  'let- 
ter' refers  to  the  command,  viewed  as  a  written  form,  which  required 
outward  circumcision.  But  various  explanations  have  been  given  of 
'  spii'it.'  (1.)  The  Holy  Spirit,  through  whose  power  circumcision 
takes  place.  This  is  the  preferable  sense,  agreeing  with  chap.  7  :  6. 
(The  exact  reference  is  to  the  indwelling  Holy  Spirit.  See  Excursus 
under  chap.  7.)  (2.)  The  human  spirit.  Objectionable,  since  unless 
the  human  spirit  is  regenerated  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  does  not  foi-m  a 
proper  contrast  with  'letter.'  (3.)  Other  views,  the  true  spirit  of 
the  laAv,  the  true  spirit  of  the  Jew,  etc.  All  these  give  to  'spirit'  an 
unusual  sense.  Observe :  Paul  docs  not  make  an  absolute  antagonism 
between  letter  and  spirit.  He  does  not  object  to  the  rite  which  the 
'letter'  commanded.  The  Holy  Spirit  caused  the  'letter'  to  be  writ- 
ten ;  even  in  the  indefinite  sense  so  often  given  to  spirit,  there  is  no 
opposition,  since  we  reach  a  knowledo^e  of  the  spirit  of  a  command 
through  the  letter.  Most  objectionable  is  the  use  of  this  qualifi'd  an- 
tithesis to  make  an  antagonism  between  the  literal  and  spiritual  sense 


3:  1.]  ROMANS  III.  39 

cisiou  is  that  of  the  heart,  in  the  spirit,  not  in  the  let- 
ter; whose  praise  is  not  of  men,  but  of  God. 

Chapter  3  :  1-20. 

The  Scriptural  Proof  of  the   Guilt  of  the  Jews. 

What  advantage  then  hath  the  Jew  ?     Or  what  is 

of  Scripture. — "Whose  praise,  etc.  *  Whose '  may  be  either  neuf  er  or 
masculine,  referring  to  true  .Judaism  and  true  circumcision,  or.  to  the 
true  .Jew.  The  former  is  more  grammatical.  'This  praise  is  the  holy 
satisfaction  oi  God  (His  being  we//  jAeaaed),  as  He  has  so  often  de- 
clared it  to  the  righteous  in  the  Scriptures.  Observe  how  perfectly 
analogous  vers.  28,  29,  in  the  tenor  of  thought,  are  to  the  idea  of  the 
invisible  church^  (Meyer).  The  whole  section  is  a  declaration  that  reli- 
gious privilege  (from  birth,  knowledge,  ritual  observance)  increases 
the  guilt  of  those  whose  morality  does  not  correspond.  This  position 
does  not  detract  from,  but  rather  enhances  our  estimate  of  these  privi- 
leges. 'What  a  remarkable  parallelism,  that  of  this  whole  passage  with 
the  declaration  of  Jesus  (Matt.  8:  11,  12):  "Many  shall  come  from 
the  east  and  the  west,"  etc.  Yet  there  is  nothing  whatever  to  indicate 
that  Paul  has  imitated.  The  same  truth  has  created  for  itself  in  each 
case  an  original  form'  (Godet).  Here  is  the  warrant  for  the  Protest- 
ant distinction  between  the  visible  and  the  invisible  church,  and  also 
between  the  church  and  the  kingdom  of  God. 

(3)   The  Scriptural  Proof  of  the  Guilt  of  the  Jews,  vers.  1-20. 

This  section  forms  the  conclusion  of  the  first  part :  '  Every  one  needs  this  power 
unto  salvation.'  "While  in  general  it  may  be  regarded  as  presenting  the  Scriptural 
proof  that  the  Jews  are  guilty,  the  train  of  thought  is  so  involved,  that  it  i*  rightly 
deemed  one  of  the  most  difficult  passages  in  the  Epistle.  The  connection  with  chap. 
2,  is  obvious:  If  true  Judaism  and  circumcision  are  thus  represented  (chap.  2  :  28, 
29),  what  is  the  advantage  of  tlie  Jew  ?  etc.  Tlie  positive  advantage  is  the  possession 
of  the  Scriptures ;  ver.  2.  But  the  Apostle  digresses  to  consider  several  misconcep- 
tions which  may  arise  in  view  of  this  privilege  of  the  Jew  taken  in  connection  with 
his  guilt ;  vers.  3-8.  The  form  is  not  strictly  that  of  a  dialogue  between  a  Jewish 
objector  and  the  Apostle,  but  the  misconceptions  are  from  a  Jewish  (or  Jewish  Chris- 
tian i  point  of  view.  The  want  of  faith  on  the  part  of  some  Jews  cannot  annul  God'a 
faithfulness,  for  God  must  be  true  (vers.  3,  4) ;  if  God's  righteousness  seems  to  be  fur- 
thered by  sin,  God  is  not  unjust  in  punishing  it  (vers.  5,  G) ;  for  this  amounts  to  the 
abhorrent  principle  that  it  is  right  to  do  evil  that  good  may  come  (vers.  7,  8).  The 
main  thought  is  then  resumed  in  ver.  9,  which  restates  the  charge  of  sin  against  all 
men  (set  forth  in  chaps.  1  and  2).  The  Apostle,  then,  by  abundant  Scriptural  citation 
(vers.  10-18),  shows  God's  estimate  of  human  character,  and  he  applies  this  estimate 
to  the  Jews  especially  (ver.  19),  reaching  in  ver.  20  the  great  principle  which  must  be 
accepted  before  the  need  of  the  gospel  is  fe!t. 


40  ROMANS  III.  [3:  2,  3. 

2  the  profit  of  circumcision  ?     Much  every  way :  first 
of  all,  that  they  were  intrusted  with   the  oracles  of 

3  God.     For  what  if  some  were  without  faith  ?   shall 

Ver.  1.  What  advantage  then,  etc.  On  the  connection  of 
thought,  see  above. — The  Jew.  Used  generically  for  the  Jews. — 
The  profit,  or,  '  benefit,'  of  circumcision.  This  specification  is 
naturally  introduced  in  view  of  the  previous  discussion  (chap.  2  : 
25-29). 

Ver.  2.  Much  every  way.  This  refers  to  both  the  preceding 
questions.  '  Every  way '  means,  under  every  moral  and  religious 
aspect  whichever  way  you  look  at  it. — First  of  all.  This  is  more 
literal  than  'chiefly'  (comp.  chap.  1:8).  The  possession  of  the  Old 
Testament  was  the  chief  advantage,  but  '  first  of  all '  suggests  that 
there  were  others  which  the  writer  does  not  name  here  (but  details  in 
chap.  9  ;  4,  5).  The  form  of  the  original  points  to  a  '  secondly  '  which 
is  omitted.  (The  word  rendered  '  because '  is  not  found  in  the  best 
authorities.) — They  were  intrusted  with.  This  is  the  more  ex- 
act rendering. — The  oracles  of  God.  '  Oracles,' lit.,  sayings,  not 
limited  to  prophetic  sayings.  The  Old  Testament  is  meant.  Even  those 
writers  who  refer  the  phrase  to  the  Messianic  prophecies  admit  that 
these  are  found  throughout  the  Old  Testament,  and  that  the  possession 
of  that  book  placed  the  'oracles'  in  their  trust.  It  clearly  follows 
that  the  possession  of  the  entire  written  revelation  of  God  is  to  be 
deemed  a  greater  privilege. 

Ver.  3.  For  -what  if ;  as  is  the  case,  thus  introducing  the  fact  as 
an  objection  to  be  answered.  Others  divide  the  verse:  'For  what? 
(i.  e.,  what  is  the  case).  If  some,'  etc.  This  turns  the  whole  into  a 
guarantee  that  the  oracles  are  still  intrusted  to  them.  Both  views  are 
grammatical,  but  the  usual  one  is  preferable.  Such  objections  would 
be  addressed  to  the  Apostle  continually,  as  he  labored,  more  or  less 
assailed  by  Jewish  opposition  ;  while  the  confirmation  of  the  fact  of 
ver.  2  seems  unnecessary. — Some  w^ere  w^ithout  faith.  The 
emendations  of  this  verse  are  designed  to  reproduce  the  verbal  corres- 
pondence of  the  original.  There  are,  however,  two  views  of  the 
sense  :  (1.)  That  the  faithfulness  of  the  Jews  to  their  trust  (ver.  2)  is 
meant.  (2)  That  unbelief  in  the  Messiah  is  referred  to.  In  favor  of 
(1)  are:  the  immediate  context,  both  ver.  2,  and  the  thought  of  God's 
'  faithfulness '  which  follows ;  the  fact  that  the  doctrine  of  faith  has 
not  yet  become  prominent.  But  in  support  of  (2)  may  be  urged  the 
more  usual  sense  of  the  words  ;  the  fact  that  God's  dealings,  as  told  in 
the  Old  Testament  make  the  reference  to  '  unfaithfulness '  superfluous  ; 
the  digressive  character  of  the  passage,  the  casual  connection  between 
unbelief  and  disobedience  recognized  in  the  Bible  (if  they  were  un- 
faithful it  was  because  they  were  without  faith).  We  prefer  (2),  and 
find  an  objection  growing  out  of  the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  at  that  time, 
which  is  more  fully  discussed  in  chans.  9-11.     The  digression  is  then 


3:  4,]  ROMANS  III.  41 

4  their  want  of  faith  make  of  none  effect  the  faithful- 
ness of  God  ?  ^  God  forbid  :  yea,  let  God  be  found 
true,  but  every  man  a  liar ;  as  it  is  written, 

1  Gr.  Be  it  not  so  :  and  so  elsewhere. 

into  a  region  of  thought  where  the  Apostle's  deepest  feelings  were 
concerned.  A  Jew  might  well  raise  such  an  objection,  as  if  to  say  : 
'  But  how  do  you  reconcile  this  advantage  with  the  rejection  of  the 
Messiah  you  preach  ?  '  As  Lange  remarks,  the  '  unbelievers  always 
leiiiain  in  the  minority  in  real  significance,  let  their  number  be  ever 
80  great.' — Shall  their  •want  of  faith,  etc.  The  original  shows 
that  a  negative  answer  is  expected  —  The  faithfulness  of  God. 
The  word  used  is  '  faith,'  but  that  it  has  here  the  sense  of  faith- 
fulness is  plain,  from  the  Old  Testament  usage,  and  from  the  fact 
that  no  other  sense  is  appropriately   applied  to  God. 

Ver.  4.  God  forbid.  The  expression  is  used  in  animated  discus- 
sions, fourteen  times  by  Paul  (ten  times  in  this  Epistle),  and  else- 
where in  the  New  Testament  (Luke  20:  16).  It  is  an  indignant 
denial,  including  pious  horror,  and  hence  is  equivalent  to  the  English 
phrase  'God  forbid,'  to  which,  however,  objection  has  been  raised, 
both  because  it  is  not  a  translation  of  the  Greek,  and  on  account  of 
the  unnecessary  use  of  the  name  of  God.  (See  literal  rendering  in  R.  V. 
marg.)  — Yea,  let  God  be  found  (lit.,  'become')  true  The  only 
question  here  is  whether  Paul  refers  to  what  God  is,  or  what  He  is 
proven  to  be.  The  latter  seems  to  accord  better  with  the  word  '  be- 
come,' and  suits  the  context  best.  Hence  we  explain  :  be  seen  and 
acknowledged,  even  by  His  enemi'es,  to  be  truthful.  His  faithfulness 
is  essential  to  His  truthfulness  :  He  cannot  be  found  true,  if  men  can 
make  of  none  effect  His  faithfulness  (ver.  3). — But  every  man  a 
liar.  Every  man  who  is  unfaithful  is  a  liar,  but  the  reference  is  to 
the  recognition  of  the  fact.  '  Rather  let  us  believe  all  men  on  earth  to 
have  broken  their  word  and  troth,  than  God  His.  Whatever  becomes 
of  men  and  their  truth  Jlis  truth  must  standfast'  (Alford). — As  it  is 
■written.  Ps.  51 :  4  ;  the  penitential  psalm  written  by  David  after 
the  visit  of  Nathan  (2  Sam.  12:  1-14).  It  is  precisely  the  recognition 
of  his  sin  as  against  God  (see  first  part  of  Ps.  51  :  4),  that  led  David 
to  add  the  passage  here  quoted.  The  quotation  is  from  the  LXX., 
which  varies  verbally  from  the  Hebrew.  As  here  used,  it  gives 
exactly  the  profound  sense  of  the  original. — That,  i.  e.,  'in  order 
that'  (both  here  and  in  the  ^Psalm^l.  This  sense  is  essential  to  tlie 
train  of  thought.  Man's  sin  is  overruled  for  the  glory  of  God  (vers. 
5-7),  through  it  Gods  justice  shines.  The  difficulty  such  a  view  al- 
ways occasions  is  spoken  of;  thus  proving  that  this  is  the  sense. — 
Thou  ;  i.  e.,  God,  to  whom  David  speaks. — Mightest  be  justified, 
i.  €.,  regarded  as,  declared,  accounted  righteous.  The  word,  in  the 
Old  Testament,  is  frequently  used  of  God,  to  whom  no  other  sense  is 
applicable.     Indeed,  no  other  sense  suits  the  Old  Testament  usage  in 


42  ROMANS  III.  [3:5. 

That  thou  mightest  be  justified  in  thy  words, 
And   mightest  prevail  when   thou   comest   into 
judgement. 
5  But  if  our  unrighteousness  commendeth  the  righteous- 
ness of  God,  what  shall  we  say  ?     Is  God  unrighteous 

general;  no  other  is  admissible  in  the  New.  The  sense  'make  right- 
eous '  is  indefensible  on  any  ground  but  that  of  doctrinal  prejudgment. 
Before  the  doctrine  of  justiti cation  by  faith  is  introduced,  Paul  him- 
self furnishes  a  key  to  his  meaning,  by  retaining  this  technical  term 
from  the  LXX.,  though  it  deviates  from  the  Hebrew. — In  thy  words, 
wliat  thou  hast  spoken,  the  '  oracles  '  just  spoken  of  Avould  come  under 
this  head. — Mightest  prevail.  The  Hebrew  is:  '  be  pure.'  (A,  V. 
'be  clean').  The  reference  in  Paul's  quotation,  is  to  winning  a  law 
suit. — When  thou  comest  into  judgement.  Hebrew  :  '  in  thy 
judging'  (A.  v.:  'when  thou  judgest'j.  The  passive  (or  middle) 
form  here  used  may  mean:  'when  thou  art  judged,'  'when  thou 
standest  in  judgment'  (middle),  /.  e.,  as  the  Judge,  or,  'when  thou 
comest  into  judgment,'  disputest  with  men.  The  last  sense  preserves 
the  parallelism,  and  is  strictly  gramn)atical.  God  is  represented  as 
humbling  Himself  to  appear  as  a  party  in  the  judicial  case,  upholding 
His  own  righteousness  so  that  He  may  prevail,  be  declared  righteous. 
<  It  is  a  mark  of  genuine  piety  to  be  disposed  always  to  justify  God, 
and  to  condemn  ourselves'  (Hodge).  Thus  the  Apostle  reaches  this 
point:  God's  faithfulness  cannot  be  made  void  ;  even  the  sin  of  men 
makes  His  truthfulness  and  faithfulness  known.  Here  is  the  starting- 
point  for  a  new  objection. 

Ver.  5.  But,  introducing  the  common  objection.  '  If  God  thus 
prevails,  do  Ave  not,  by  our  sin,  help  on  His  glory.'  The  answer  to 
this  objection  follows  (vers.  6-8).  Paul  admits  the  premise,  but  denies 
the  conclusion. — Our  unrighteousness.  The  opposite  of  '  right- 
eousness;' here  used  quite  generally. — Commendeth,  or,  '  estab- 
lisheth.'  The  word  having  both  senses.  The  former  makes  the  ob- 
jection stronger ;  here  the  stronger ;  in  chap.  5 :  8,  where  the 
word  occurs  again,  both  senses  are  suggested. — The  righteous- 
ness of  God.  Here  His  character  or  attribute.— What  shall 
■we  say  ?  This  phrase  occurs  several  times  in  this  Tpistle,  and 
was  frequent  among  the  Rabbins.  '  It  is  a  formula  of  meditation  on 
a  difficulty,  a  problem,  in  which  there  is  danger  of  a  false  con- 
clusion. It  was  also  in  use  among  the  classical  authors.'  (Lange.) 
This  is  the  preparation  for  the  negative  answer  to  the  next  question. 
— Is  God  unrighteous,  etc.  This  is  the  unwarranted  conclusion, 
which  is  denied  by  the  very  form  of  the  question  in  the  original. 
The  emphasis  rests  on  'unrighteous,'  which  refers  to  His  character  as 
Judge  (comp.  vers.  6,  7). — Who  visiteth  with  wrath?  Lit ,  'the 
wrath,'  His  acknowledged  judicial  wrath.  The  whole  phrase  is  a 
designation  of  God,  as  One  who  is  inflicting  the  wrath,  and  is  not 


g :  G,  7.]  ROMANS  III.  43 

who  visitetli  with  wrath  ?     (I  speak  after  tlie  manner 

6  of  men.)     God  forbid  :  for  then  how  shall  God  judge 

7  the  world  ?     ^  But  if  the  truth  of  God  through  my  lie 

1  Many  ancient  authorities  read  For. 

equivalent  to,  when  He  inflicts,  etc. — I  speak  after  the  manner  of 
men.  This  parenthetical  clause  is  a  third  protest  against  the  wrong 
conclusion,  which  is  directly  denied  in  ver.  6.  He  speaks  as  mcu 
would  speak;  the  question  is  one  he  could  not  ask  as  a  Christian, 
still  less  as  an  Apostle.  'I  say  this  just  as  an  ordinary  man,  not 
under  the  influence  of  the  divine  Spirit,  may  well  say  it'  (Meyer). 
So  that  the  phrase  favors,  instead  of  opposing,  Paul's  inspiration. 

Ver.  6.  God  forbid.  Exactly  as  in  ver.  4. — For  then  how, 
for  otherwise  how,  etc.  The  denial  rests  on  the  universally  accepted 
truth  that  God  will  judge  the  world,  all  mankind.  This  the  Apostle  does 
not  prove,  but  assumes  as  an  accepted  truth.  The  argument  is  :  God  will 
judge  the  world  ;  to  do  this  He  must  be  righteous  ;  therefore  He  can- 
not be  unrighteous.  The  argument  would  hold  with  his  readers.  In 
fact,  when  men  deny  that  God  will  judge  the  workl,  argument  with 
them  is  useless.  The  principle,  that  God  cannot  be  the  author  of  bin 
which  He  judges,  is  not  expressed,  but  underlies  the  whole  argument 
(vers.  3-8). 

Ver.  7.  But.  The  authorities  are  quite  evenly  divided  between 
the  two  readings  (R.  V.  text  and  margin);  'but'  is  preferable,  how- 
ever, as  the  more  difficult  reading.  'The  argument  accordingly  rests 
on  the  basis,  that  in  the  case  put  ("then"  from  ver.  6)  the  relation  of 
God  to  the  judgment  of  the  world  would  yield  two  absurd  conse- 
quences' (Meyer).  'For'  presents  this  as  Paul's  argument;  'but,' 
as  an  objection  met  at  once. — The  truth  of  God.  Comp.  ver.  4. 
'In  the  first  instance.  His  veracity  as  involved  in  His  threats  and 
promises,  and  then  those  other  attributes,  especially  justice,  that  are 
intimately  connected  with  this'  (Sanday). — Through  my  lie.  The 
emphasis  rests  on  this  phrase  (notice  the  emended  order),  which  here 
refers  to  moral  falsehood;  comp.  'our  unrighteousness'  (ver.  5U 
Whether  the  objection  comes  from  a  Jew  or  Gentile  has  been  much 
disputed.  But  as  the  argument  is  based  on  the  fact  that  God  will 
judge  'the  world,'  no  special  reference  is  necessary.  (Weiss  labors  to 
show  that  the  Apostle  is  here  referring  to  his  own  preaching,  which 
the  Jews  regarded  as  a  'lie.')— Abounded  unto  his  glory.  An- 
other form  of  the  thought  of  ver.  5;  but  here  something  must  be  sup- 
plied: If  this  abounding  unto  His  glory  is  a  sufficient  justification. 
The  state  of  things  at  the  day  of  judgment  is  in  the  hypothesis.— 
"Why  (if  this  is  a  suflScient  justification,  does  He  judge  the  world, 
and  thus)  am  I  also  (I  who  thus  glorify  him)  still  judged,  i.  e,  at 
the  day  of  judgment,  as  a  sinner?  The  absurd  consequence,  a^ 
respects  God,  is  that  He  has  no  right  to  judge  man  as  a  sinner,  because 
man's  falsehood  glorifies  His  truth.     The  o'rder  we  adopt  places  the 


44  ROMANS  III.  [3 :  8,  9. 

abounded  unto  his  glory,  why  am  I  also  still  judged 

8  as  a  sinner  ?  and  why  not  (as  we  be  slanderously  re- 
ported, and  as  some  affirm  that  we  say),  Let  us  do 
evil,  that  good  may  come?  whose  condemnation  is 
just. 

9  What  then  ?     ^  Are  we  in  worse  case  *  than  they  ? 

1  Or,  do  we  excuse  ourselves  f 
*  Read  hetter  for  in  worse  case,  and  omit  the  marg. — Am.  Com. 

emphasis  on  'judged.'  '  I'  here  is  to  be  taken  generally,  as  '  my'  in 
the  previous  clause,  although  an  application  to  the  Jew  is  probably 
intended.  'Still,'  i.  e.,  after  the  supposed  result  has  occurred,  fur- 
nishing the  supposed  excuse. 

Ver.  8.  And  why  not.  This  is  parallel  to  '  why  am  I,'  etc.  (ver. 
7).  The  second  absurd  consequence,  as  respects  man,  is  the  evil 
principle,  so  strongly  condemned,  as  carrying  its  refutation  with  it. 
The  construction  would  regularly  be:  and  why  not  let  us  do  evil,  etc., 
but  the  mention  of  the  false  accusation  leads  to  an  irregularity.  Some 
propose  to  avoid  this  by  supplying:  'let  us  say.' — Slanderously 
reported;  lit.,  'blasphemed.'  Such  slander  was  in  the  last  instance 
blasphemy,  since  thus  God's  character  was  outraged.  Here  the  refer- 
ence is  to  what  they  were  reported  as  doing. — Affirm  that  'we  say, 
Let  us,  etc.  The  early  Christians  were  charged  with  even  asserting 
this  false  principle,  which  would  have  been  worse  than  the  previous 
charge.  Men  might  do  this  without  being  so  hardened  as  to  adopt  it 
as  a  doctrinal  principle.  The  foundation  of  this  slander  was  doubtless 
the  doctrine  of  free  grace,  and  the  Christian  non-observance  of  the 
Mosaic  law.  Similar  slanderous  and  blasphemous  inferences  have 
frequently  been  made  from  Scriptural  truth. — Whose  condemna- 
tion is  just.  '  Who^e,'  i.  e.,  of  those  who  practice  and  announce 
thi<  evil  principle,  not  the  slanderers.  'Damnation'  is  too  specific  a 
rendering  of  the  original  word,  which  means  'condemnation'  of  any 
kind.  The  absurdity  of  the  principle,  that  the  end  justifies  the  means, 
is  not  proven;  the  Apostle  makes  short  work  of  an  objection  which 
has  this  logical  issue.  A  doctrine  directly  leading  to  immoral  results 
cannot  belons;  to  the  gospel  Paul  is  setting  forth. 

Ver.  9.  "What  then.  The  Apostle  now  returns  to  his  main  argu- 
ment, after  the  digression,  which,  however,  is  referred  to  in  tliis 
question. — Are  "we  in  worse  case  (Am  Com.,  better)  than 
they  ?  That  '  we '  refers  to  the  Jews  appears,  from  the  whole  argu- 
ment, as  well  as  from  Paul's  usage.  But  the  exact  meaning  of  the 
verb  used  (the  only  Greek  word  occurring  in  the  question)  has  been 
much  discussed.  In  the  active  voice  it  means,  to  hold  before,  than  to 
surpass,  to  excel;  in  the  middle,  to  hold  before  one's  self,  hence  to 
put  forward  something  as  a  defence,  or  excuse ;  in  the  passive,  to  be 
surpassed  or  preferred.     The  form  here  may  be  either  middle  or  pas- 


3:  10.]  ROMANS  III.  45 

No,  in  no  wise :  for  we  before  laid  to  the  charge  both 
10  of  Jews  and  Greeks,  that  they  are  all  under  sin ;  as  it 
is  written, 

There  is  none  righteous,  no,  not  one  ; 

sive,  but  the  former  is  uncommon  in  the  Xew  Testament.  (1.)  The 
usual  explanation  takes  it  as  middle,  with  the  meaning  ;  '  have  we  any 
advantage '  =  '  are  we  better  than  they  ?  '  This  suits  the  context  ad- 
mirably ;  in  ver.  2,  the  advantage  of  the  Jew  was  spoken  of,  but  the 
digression  (vers.  3,  8)  may  well  be  followed  by  the  assertion  that  the 
Jew  is  no  better.  This  explanation  gives  an  active  sense,  but  middle 
verbs  frequently  pass  over  into  an  active  sense.  (2.)  Strictly  middle  : 
*  Do  we  put  forward  anything  in  our  defence  ?  '  This  is  equivalent  to 
'do  we  excuse  ourselves'  (R.  V.  marg.,  which  the  Am.  Com.  reject). 
But  this  would  require  an  object  after  the  verb.  (3.)  Passive,  (a.) 
'  Are  we  surpassed  (by  the  Gentiles)  ?  A  Jew  would  hardly  ask  such 
a  question,  which  is  moreover  out  of  keeping  with  the  context.  This 
seems  to  be  the  interpretation  implied  in  the  rendering  of  the  Eng. 
Com.  ('in  worse  case').  (6.)  'Are  we  preferred  (by  God)?'  But 
this  also  is  opposed  by  the  context,  which  treats  of  man's  sin,  not  of 
God's  power. — No,  in  no  -wise.  The  order  of  the  Greek,  however, 
gives  us  the  more  literal  sense,  'not  altogether,'  not  in  all  respects  (one 
advantage  has  been  named  in  ver.  2) ;  but  the  common  explanation  is 
allowable  and  accords  better  with  the  context.  There  is  no  contradic- 
tion between  'much  every  way'  (ver.  2)  and  this  denial.  The  former 
refers  to  historical  and  extern.d  advantages,  the  latter  to  the  moral  re- 
sult.—For  we  before  laid  to  the  charge;  not  'proved  '  (A.  V.) 
The  word  suggests  a  formal  indictment.  The  charge  was  made  in  the 
previous  part  of  the  Epistle  (chaps.  1 :  ]  8  ;  2  :  29). — Both  Je"ws  and 
Gentiles.  The  charge  had  been  made  first  against  the  Gentiles 
(chap.  1).  then  against  the  Jews  (chap.  2),  but  the  order  is  here  re- 
versed, .-ince  the  argument  is  directed  against  the  Jews.—  That  they 
are  all  under  sin.  While  unregenerate,  they  are  all  under  the 
power  of  sin  (the  notion  of  guilt  is  implied,  but  not  expressed).  '  All ' 
is  emphatic. 

Vers.  10-18.  As  it  is  written.  This  formula  here  introduces  a 
number  of  Old  Testament  quotations,  describing  the  moral  corruption 
of  the  times  of  David  and  the  prophets.  Human  nature  being  essen- 
tially tlie  same  always  and  everywhere,  the  description  holds  good 
universally,  but  the  application  here  is  to  the  Jews  first,  afterwards  to 
'all  the  world'  (ver.  19).  In  Ps.  14  the  general  application  is  most 
obvious,  hence  it  is  quoted  first.  '  The  arrangement  is  such  that  tes-  [^ 
tiraony  is  adduced :  1st,  for  the  state  of  sin  generally  (vers.  10-12  ^ 
2d,  the  practice  of  sin  in  word  (vers.  13-14)  and  deed  (vers.  15—17) ; 
and  '6d,  the  sinful  source  of  the  wliole  (ver.  18) '  Meyer. 

Ver.  10.    There  is  none  righteous,  etc.    The  citation  from  Ps. 
14:   1-3  (covering  here  vers.  lU-12)  varies  from  the  LXX.,  especially 


46  ROMANS  III.  [3:  11-14. 

11  There  is  none  that  understandeth, 
There  is  none  that  seelieth  after  God ; 

12  They  are  all  turned  aside,  they  are  together  be- 

come unprofitable ; 
There  is  none  that  doeth  good,  no,  not  so  much 
as  one : 

13  Their  throat  is  an  open  sepulchre  ; 
With  their  tongues  they  have  used  deceit. 
The  poison  of  asps  is  under  their  lips : 

14  AVhose  mouth  is  full  of  cursing  and  bitterness : 

in  this  verse,  which  begins  with  the  last  clause  of  Ps.  14 :  1.    Hebrew  : 

*  there  is  not  a  doer  of  good,'     LXX. :   '  there  is  not  (one)  doing  good, 
there  is  not  even  one.'     'Righteous'  is  substituted,  to  contrast  with 

*  under  sin.' 

Ver.  11.  There  is  none  that  understandeth,  etc.  Latter  half 
of  Ps.  14 :  2  ;  'so  quoted  that  the  negative  sense  which  results  indi- 
rectly from  the  text  in  the  Hebrews  and  LXX.  is  expressed  by  Paul 
directly'  (Meyer).  As  regards  the  meaning,  both  parts  of  the  verse 
refer  to  impiety  :  sin  being  represented  as  folly,  and  then  as  failure 
to  seek  God. 

Ver.  12.  They  have  all  turned  aside,  etc.  Accurately  quoted 
from  Ps.  14:  3  (LXX.).— Unprofitable.  More  literally,  '  usele-!S,' 
'  worthless.' — No,  not  so  much  as  one.  '  There  is  not  even  unto 
one.'  The  same  form  occurs  in  ver.  1  of  the  Psalm,  from  which  ver. 
10  here  varies. 

~  Ver.  13.  Their  throat  is  an  open  sepulchre.  Quoted  accu- 
rately from  the  Greek  version  of  Ps.  5  :  9.  The  reference  is  to  sinful 
speech.  The  figure  is  either  from  the  noxious  odor,  or  from  the  insa- 
tiableness  of  an  open  grave.  In  either  case,  the  reference  is  to  the 
corrupting  character  of  the  speech. — They  have  used  deceit. 
Habitual,  continued  action  is  expressed.  Hebrew :  '  their  tongues 
they  rcake  smooth.' — The  poison  of  asps,  etc.  Accurately  quoted 
from  (LXX.)  Ps.  110*  3,  latter  half  of  the  verse.  The  Hebrew  is: 
'  poison  of  an  adder  ; '  but  the  distinction  between  the  two  classes  of 
venomous  serpents  is  not  maintained  in  the  LXX.  The  reference  is  to 
the  malice  which  is  behind  the  cunning  of  their  tongues.  Perhaps 
the  thought  of  the  poison  bag  under  the  serpent's  fangs  suggests  the 
figure.  '  "i  ^ '.  3 

Ver.  14.  Whose  mouth,  etc.  (From  Ps.  10:  7.)  The  variations 
from  the  LXX.  are  slight.  The  Hel)rew  is :  '  His  mouth  is  full  of 
oaths,  and  deceit,  and  fraud.'  '  Deceit,'  which  occurs  in  the  original, 
was  omitted,  because  already  mention-^d  (ver.  3). — Full  of  cursing 
and  bitterness.  The  bitterness  which  prompts  the  speech  is  the 
cause  of  the  cursing. 


3:  15-19]  ROMANS  III.  47 

15  Their  feet  are  swift  to  shed  blood  : 

16  Destruction  and  misery  are  in  their  ways  : 

17  And  the  way  of  peace  have  they  not  known  : 

18  And  there  is  no  fear  of  God  before  their  eyes. 

19  Now  we  know  that  what  things  soever  the  law 

Vers.  15-17.  Their  feet,  etc.  Sinful  doings  are  here  described  in 
a  quotation  from  Is.  59  :  7,  8.  There  are  some  omissions,  as  will 
appear  from  the  following  rendering  of  the  original  passage  in 
Hebrew  :  — 

'  Their  feet  run  to  do  evil, 
And  they  haste  to  shed  innuceut  blood 
Their  thoughts  are  thoughts  uf  iniquity  ; 
Wasting  and  destruction  are  in  their  highways ; 
A  way  of  peace  they  have  not  known, 
And  there  is  no  judgment  in  their  patlis. 
Their  paths  they  have  made  perverse  for  themselves  ; 
No  treader  in  it  hath  known  peace.' 

The  sense  is  plain ;  they  readily  commit  murder  (ver.  15)  ;  wherever 
they  go  they  produce  destruetion  and  misery  (ver.  16) ;  the  one  op- 
posite way,  that  where  men  walk  peacefully,  is  strange  to  them. 

Ver.  18.  There  is  no  fear  of  God,  etc.  (From  Ps.  36  :  1.) 
*  The  transgression  of  the  wicked  is  affirming  within  my  heart :  "Fear 
of  God  is  not  before  his  eyes."  '  The  quotation  from  the  LXX.  is 
exact.  '  Fear  of  God,'  reverence  of  Him,  is  here  figuratively  spoken 
of,  as  if  it  existed  external  to  man,  for  a  rule  of  life.  Pauls  closing 
quotation  reaffirms  what  the  Scriptures  everywhere  teach,  that  the 
source  of  sin  is  a  wrong  attitude  toward  God  ;  not  to  fear  God  is  to  be 
(aHd~~5ecome  yet  more)  imrnoraTT 


Ver.  1 9.  Now  -we  know.  As  in  chap.  2  :  2,  a  truth  admitted 
by  all  his  readers  is  thus  introduced.  The  Apostle's  argument  is  that 
these  Scripture  passages  must  apply  to  the  Jews  as  well  as  the  Gen- 
tiles.— The  law  saith,  i.  e.,  the  Old  Testament,  as  a  whole  ;  not  the 
Mosaic  law  alone,  since  other  parts  of  Scripture  have  been  cited.  Re- 
garded as  a  rule  of  life,  the  whole  Old  Testament  is  properly  called 
'  the  law.' — Speaketh,  speaks  out,  makes  known  by  word — Who 
are  under  the  law  ;  lit.  ;  'in  the  law,'  as  in  chap.  2:  12;  but  the 
article  is  inserted  here,  since  the  argument  turns  on  the  specific  refer- 
ence to  the  Mc^aic  law. — That.  'In  order  that.'  There  is  no  ne- 
cessity for  weakening  the  exact  sense.  This  was  the  purpose  of  God 
in  thus  speaking  through  the  law.  Through  this  conviction  of  the 
whole  world  the  gospel  was  revealed  (comp.  Gal.  3;  22.  23).  Notice 
the  correspondence  with  the  thought  which  introduces  tlis  division  of 
the  Epistle  (chap,  ^  1^  'for  the  wrath  of  God,'  etc.). — Every 
mouth  may  be  stopped.  .Jew  as  well  as  Gentile.  The  reference  is 
not  to  the  final  judgment,  but  to  the  more  immediate  effect  of  the  law  ' 


48  ROMANS  III.  [3:  20. 

sayeth,  it  speaketh   to  them  that  are  under  the  law ; 

that  every  mouth   may  be  stopped,  and  all  the  world 

may  be  brought  under  the  judgement  of  God:  because 

20  ^by  ^the  works  of  the  law  shall  no  flesh  be  ^justified 

1  Gr.  ot(t  of.  2  Or,  works  of  law.  3  Or,  accounted  righteous. 

it  cuts  off  every  wrong  ground  of  justification  ;  every  one  is  without 
excuse. — All  the  world.  Tiiis  is  the  positive  side  of  the  purpose. 
All  men  are  here  included. — May  be  brought  under  the  judge- 
ment of  God.  This  paraphrase  brings  out  the  sense,  which  includes 
more  than  *  guilty.'  The  whole  world  was  to  be  convicted  of  guilt, 
proven  obnoxious  to  punishment.  To  '  God '  satisfaction^  for  sin  is 
due. 

Ver.  20.  Because.  The  word  here  used  means,  in  classical  au- 
thors, '  therefore,'  giving  a  conclusion  from  preceding  statements;  but 
the  prevailing  sense  in  the  New  Testament  is  '  because,'  assigning  a 
reason  for  what  precedes.  Taken  in  that  sense  here,  it  shows  why 
this  conviction  of  the  whole  world  must  be  the  result  of  God^s  speak- 
ing in  the  law.  (This  verse  should  not  be  separated  by  a  period  from 
ver.  r.).)— By  the  -works  of  the  la-w ,  lit.,  'from  works  of 
law.'  But  to  refer  '  law  '  to  anything  else  than  the  Mosaic  law  is  to 
weaken  the  passage  greatly,  and  '  works,'  as  here  defined  is  equivalent 
to  'the  works,'  in  English.  The  Mosaic  law,  as  a  whole,  is  referred 
to;  'the  whole  revealed  law  as  an  undivided  unity,  yet  with  special 
regard  to  the  moral  law.'  A  reference  to  the  cei^emonial  law  alone  is  for- 
bidden by  the  last  clause  of  the  verse.  The  verse  admits  of  an  appli- 
cation to  law  in  general ;  but  to  regard  this  as  the  primary  thought  is 
contrary  to  the  scope  of  the  Apostle's  argument.  '  Works  of  the  law' 
are  works  required  by  the  law,  in  harmony  with  the  law.  '  good  works,' 
as  they  are  popularly  termed.  Some  (the  Roman  Catholic  expositors, 
etc.)  refer  the  plirase  to  works  produced  by  the  law,  i.  e.,  without  the 
impulse  of  the  Holy  Spirit  But  this  distinction  implies  that  works 
wrought  by  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit  may  be  a  ground  of  justifica- 
tion, which  confuses  the  latter  with  sanctification. — No  flesh.  The 
word  '  flesh '  is  here  used  in  the  Old  Testament  sense :  human  being, 
with  the  added  notion  of  frailty;  as  we  say,  no  mortal  man.  The 
New  Testament  gives  it  an  ethical  sense,  which  will  be  discussed  here- 
after. In  Ps.  143:  2,  which  resembles  this  clause,  we  find  'no  man 
(or,  no  one)  living.'  The  negative  in  the  original  is  joined  with  the 
verb,  but  in  English  we  must  translate,  'no  flesh.' — Justified,  ?.  e., 
accounted  righteous.  This  is  the  obvious  sense  in  the  parallel  passage 
in  the  Psalm.  Indeed,  this  is  the  usual  (probably  )he  exclusive)  sense 
in  the  New  Testament.  Modern  scholarship  confirms  the  view  of  the 
Protestant  reformers  on  this  point.  (See  Excursus  below  ) — In  his 
sight.  The  reference  is  to  God's  verdict,  but  not  necessarily  at  the 
last  judgment.  The  passage  affirms  that  it  is  morally  impossible  for 
any  man  at  any  time  to  be  declared  righteous  in  God's  judgment,  by 


3:  20.]  ROMANS  III.  49 

in  his  sight :  for  ^  through  the  law  coineth  the  know- 
ledge of  sin. 

1  Or,  through  laio. 

his  doing  what  God's  law  has  prescribed.  Perfect  compliance  with 
the  law  would  entitle  a  man  to  such  a  verdict  (chap.  2:  13) ;  but  the 
Apostle  thus  far  has  been  proving  that  all  men  are  sinners,  and  that 
God  purposed  to  convict  them  as  sinners  (ver.  14).  Now  he  affirms 
this  must  be  the  first  result  of  the  revelation  through  the  law,  because 
by  the  works  of  the  law  justification  is  impossible  for  every  man. 
'No  man,  even  with  an  outwardly  faultless  observance  of  the  law 
(comp.  on  Phil.  3  :  6),  is  in  a  position  to  otter  to  it  that  full  and  right 
obedience,  which  alone  would  be  the  condition  of  a  justification  inde- 
pendent of  exti'aneous  intervention ;  in  fact,  it  is  only  through  the 
law  that  man  comes  to  a  clear  perception  and  consciousness  of  his 
moral  imperfection  by  nature  (his  unrighteousness!'  (Meyer). — For 
through  the  law  cometh  the  kncwledge  of  sin.  The  word 
rendered  'knowledge'  means  full  knowledge,  recognition,  etc.  Men 
without  the  law  have  some  sense  of  siu  ;  but  only  through  the  law 
does  man  properly  recognize  the  sinfulness  of  sin  (comp.  chap.  7:  18). 
This  sentence  of  Paul,  taken  in  connection  with  Gal.  3 :  24,  25,  con- 
tains the  whole  philosophy  of  the  law  as  a  moral  educator.  This  is 
the  second  use  of  the  law,  according  to  the  old  Protestant  Divines. 
The  first  was  political ;  the  second,  convincing  (pedagogical) ;  the 
third,  didactic,  regulating  the  life  of  a  believer  (comp.  the  German : 
Ziijel,  Spiegel,  Riegel ;  restraint,  mirror,  rule).  Notice  that  this  last 
clatxse  confirms  the  usual  view  of  'law'  and  'justify.'  At  the  same 
time  it  forms  an  appropriate  conclusion  to  the  first  division  of  the 
Epistle.  All  need  the  gospel  as  God's  power  unto  salvation,  for  the 
knowledge  of  sin,  not  'righteousness  from  God,'  comes  through  the 
law.  Thus,  too,  the  way  is  opened  for  the  positive  statement  of  the 
next  division,  which  shows  that  righteousness  from  God  comes  by 
faith. 

Chapter  3  :  21—4 :  25. 

II.  Righteousness  from  God  is  by  Faith. 
The  R.  V.  (Eng.  Com  )  has  failed  to  mark  the  second  division  of  the  Epistle  at  this 
point.  The  Am.  Com.  insisted  throughout  upon  beginning  a  paragraph  at  ver  21. — 
The  theme  of  this  second  main  division  of  the  doctrinal  part  of  the  Epistle  may  be 
f  )undin  ver.  21:  (I)  The  righteousness  of  God  apart  from  the  law  has  been  made 
manifest  (i.  e.,  a  righteousness  by  faith),  and  (2.)  this  is  attested  by  the  law  and  the 
prophets.  Chap.  3:  22-?,l  expands  the  former  idea;  chap.  4  the  latter.  1.  Right- 
eousness from  God  comes  independently  of  the  law.  by  faith  in  the  atoning  Saviour 
(vers.  21-26);  hence  the  universality  of  its  application  rvers.  27-30),  establishing  the 
law;  for  2.  Abraham  was  justified  by  faith,  being  the  father  of  believers,  uncircum- 
cised  as  well  as  circumcised  (chap.  4:  1-2.'S).  The  whole  division  is  based  upon  the 
evangelical  idea  of  justification;  and  in  chap.  3:  23-20  we  have  presented  to  us  the 
4 


60  ROMANS  III.  [3:  21. 


Chapter  3:  21-31. 

Righteousness  from  God  is  to  all,  Jew  and  Gentile,  by 
Faith. 

21  *But  now  apart  from  the  law  a  righteousness  of  God 

*  Begin  a  paragraph  at  ver.  21. — Am.  Com, 

doctrine  of  justification  by  free  grace  through  faith  in  Christ,  in  its  inseparable  con- 
nection with  the  atonement  as  its  objective  basis.  We  therefore  insert  here  the  fol- 
lowing Excursus. 

The  Wort>  Justify  and  Kindred  Terms. 

The  word  'justify,' in  Greek  as  well  as  English,  is  derived  from  the  adjective 
meaning  just  or  righteous.  In  the  Bible,  however,  this  is  a  religious  idea,  involving 
conformity  to  God's  will  or  law,  and  not  a  purely  ethical  one.  The  verb,  according 
to  its  etymology,  in  both  languages,  would  moan :  to  make  righteous,  but  it  passes 
over  in  actual  use  into  the  sense  :  to  account  righteous,  having  a  forensic  or  declara- 
tive meaning.  The  question  is  :  which  meaning  does  it  have  in  the  New  Testament? 
There  ought  to  be  little  doubt  that  the  latter  sense  is  that  exclusively  intended  in  the 
New  Testament,  especially  by  the  Apostle  Taul. 

1.  The  verb  had  this  declarative  sense  in  classical  Greek,  before  the  Hellenistic 
usage  was  formed. 

2  It  is  frequently  used  in  the  LXX.,  and  in  all  but  two  or  three  cases  the  declara- 
tive sense  is  preferaVde  ;  in  many  instances  (as  where  God  is  said  to  be  justified ;  and 
where  judicial  verdicts  are  spoken  of)  it  is  the  only  possible  one 

3.  Not  only  is  the  Hebrew  usage  fairly  reproduced  in  the  LXX.,  but  the  Hebrew 
notion  of  '  righteous,'  pointing  to  God's  will  as  the  standard,  God's  estimate  as  the 
decisive  one,  would  lead  us  to  expect  the  word  to  take  on  a  technical  forensic  sense, 
during  the  two  centuries  in  which  the  peculiarities  of  New  Testament  Greek  were 
fully  developed. 

4.  In  the  New  Testament  the  declarative  sense  is  appropriate  in  every  instance. 
(Rev.  22:  11  might  have  been  an  exception,  but  the  correct  reading  gives  another 
form.)  On  the  other  hand,  while  there  are  passages  in  which  the  sense  '  make  right- 
eous '  could  be  appropriate,  in  the  majority  of  instances  such  a  meaning  is  impossible. 
The  word  occurs  thirty-nine  times  in  the  New  Testament,  twenty-seven  times  in 
Paul's  Epistles,  mostly  in  close  argumentation.  To  suppose  that  he  used  the  term  in- 
definitely, is  to  cast  contempt  on  all  his  writings.  Already  in  his  speech  at  Antioch, 
in  Pisidia  (Acts  13  :  39),  he  used  it  in  a  strictly  declarative  sense,  as  well  known  to  his 
hearers.  All  the  phenomena,  philological  and  historicnl,  point  to  a  definite,  technical 
sense,  and  that  the  sense  upheld  by  Protestants  generally.  A  comparison  of  the  pas- 
sages will  confirm  to  the  English  reader  this  view.     See  any  good  Concordance. 

'So  justify,  then,  denotes  an  act  of  jurisdiction,  the  pronouncing  of  a  verdict,  not  the 
infusion  of  a  quality.  When  God  justifies,  He  accounts  as  righteous,  treats  as  right- 
eous. That  He  will  make  righteous  those  whom  He  accounts  righteous,  follows  from 
His  character,  not  from  anything  in  the  character  of  justification  itself.  It  is  'an  act 
of  God's  free  grace,'  bestowed  without  any  merit  of  ours,  on  the  objective  ^toxxuA.  of  the 


3:  21.]  KOMANS  III.  51 

hath  been  manifested,  being  witnessed  by  the  law  and 

perfect  righteousness  of  Christ,  as  apprehended,  and  thus  made  suhj^ctive  by  a  living 
faith  (see  ver.  25).  The  doctrine  of  justification  may  be  distinguished  from  the  broader 
and  deeper  doctrineof  a  life-union  with  Christ,  but  must  not  be  sundered  from  it.  The 
same  grace  which  justifies  does  also  renew,  regenerate,  and  sanctify  ;  faith  and  love, 
justification  and  sanctification,  are  as  inseparable  in  the  life  of  the  Christian,  as  light 
and  heat  in  the  rays  of  the  sun.  The  distinction  is  necessary,  however,  for  it  is  ex- 
pressly made  in  Scripture,  and  is  of  the  greatest  importance  in  preaching  the  gospel. 

5.  The  history  of  Christian  experience  confirms  the  philological  result.  In  this 
view  was  found  the  practical  power  of  the  Eefurmation.  It  turns  the  sinner  away 
from  his  own  doing  to  seek  salvation  outside  of  himself;  when  joined  with  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ,  it  gives  peace  to  his  conscience  ;  it  comforts  the  believer  continually, 
giving  an  ever-fresh  motive  to  holy  living,  which  is  the  consequence,  not  the  cause,  of 
justification.  Notice,  too,  that  everywhere  justification  is  spoken  of  as  an  act,  not  a 
continuous  work.  The  tenses  chosen  by  Paul  indicate  this.  The  only  apparent  ex- 
ception is  in  this  verse,  where  a  present  participle  (implying  continuous  action)  is 
used ;  but  bore  the  continuity  is  in  the  persons  who  are  justified,  and  not  in  the  act 
in  the  case  of  each.  Comp.  the  full  notes,  philological  and  doctrinal,  of  Dr.  Schaff  in 
Lange,  Romans,  pp.  130  ff.,  1.38  ff. 

1.  Righteousness  from   God  is  to   all,  Jetc   and  Gentile,  by  Faith,  vers. 

21-31. 

This  section  opens  (ver.  21)  with  the  statement  of  the  theme  of  this  division,  as  con- 
trasted with  ver.  20;  vers.  22-2G  set  forth  this  way  of  faith,  grounding  justification 
upon  the  propitiator}-  death  of  Christ ;  vers.  27-30  show  that  Jewish  boasting  is  excluded, 
the  same  God  justifies  believing  Jew  and  Gentile ;  the  law  is  not  madfi  of  none  effect, 
but  established,  by  this  method  (ver.  31) ;  the  last  thought  furnishes  a  transition  to 
the  case  of  Abraham  (chap.  4.). 

Ver.  21.  But  now.  Either, 'at  this  time,'  i.  e.,  in  the  gospel  dis- 
pensation, or,  '  in  this  state  of  things,'  i.  e.,  as  further  defined.  The 
latter  is  preferable. — Apart  from  the  law.  Though  the  article  is 
wanting,  there  can  be  no  question  that  the  Mosaic  law  is  meant.  This 
phrase  should  come  first,  as  in  the  Greek,  for  emphasis;  and  further 
to  prevent  the  ungrammatical  connection  with  '  righteousness  of  God,' 
which  some  advocate.  It  qualifies  the  verb  'manifested,'  and  means 
not,  '  without  the  law,'  as  if  that  had  no  existence  and  no  otfice  to  per- 
form, but  independently  of  the  law  :  the  manifestation  has  been  with- 
out its  aid. — A  righteousness  of  God.  As  in  chap.  1:  17,  the 
article  is  wanting.  The  meaning  here  is  precisely  as  there,  a  right- 
eousness which  ^proceeds  from  God ;  it  is  given  to  the  believer  for 
Christ's  sake  in  the  act  of  justification.  It  is  here  characterized  by  a 
series  of  antitheses  ;  independent  of  the  law,  yet  authenticated  by  the 
law  and  the  prophets  (ver.  21) ;  freely  bestowed  on  the  believer,  yet 
fully  paid  for  by  the  redemption  price  of  Christ  (ver.  24)  ;  intrinsi- 
cally holy,  yet  justifying  the  sinner  (ver.  26) ;  thus  God  is  displayed 
as  Himself  the  righteous  ruler  of  the  universe  and  the  merciful  Father 


52  ROMANS  III.  [3:22,23. 

22  the  prophets  :  even  the  rigliteousness  of  God  through 
faith  Mn  Jesus  Christ  unto  all  ^them  that  believe  ;  for 

23  there  is  no  distinction ;  for  all  have  sinned,*  and  fall 

'  Or,  of.  2  Some  ancient  authorities  add  and  upon  all. 

*  Gr.  sinned. — Am.  Com. 

who  provides  free  salvation. — Hath  been  manifested.  This  reve- 
lation of  rigliteousness  is  set  forth  as  an  accomplished  and  still  con- 
tinued fact.  It  was  not  thus  known  before,  and  it  is  now  known  in- 
dependently of  the  law.— Being  witnessed.  Continuously  wit- 
nessed in  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  This  is  not  a  contradiction 
to  '  apart  from  the  law.'  The  revelation  having  been  made  in  the 
gospel,  it  turns  out  that  the  Old  Testament  attests  what  its  legal  re- 
quirements did  not  and  could  not  make  known.  While  the  law  could 
not  justify  (ver.  20),  there  is  no  contradiction  between  the  parts  of 
God's  revelation.  The  unity  of  God,  on  which  he  bases  his  argument 
in  ver.  29,  might  be  used  to  enforce  the  principle  here  set  forth  ;  in- 
deed, chap.  4  forms  the  proof  of  this  clause. 

Ver.  22.  Even  the  righteousness  of  God  through  faith,  or, 
*  a  righteousness,  however  (mediated),  through  faith'  (Meyer);  the 
article  being  omitted,  as  in  ver.  21,  before  'righteousness.'  There  is 
a  contrast  implied  between  'righteousness  of  God  in  general,  and  this 
specific  form.' — In  Jesus  Christ.  Lit.,  '  of  Jesus  Christ,'  but  as 
He  is  the  object  of  faith,  the  proper  English  expression  is  'in.'  To 
explain  the  whole  phrase  of  Christ's  faithfulness  to  tis,  or  of  faith 
produced  by  Him,  is  opposed  to  Paul's  usage. — Unto  all  them  that 
believe.  This  briefer  reading  (R.  V.  text)  is  supported  by  the  four 
oldest  manuscripts;  the  longer  reading  (A.  V.  and  R.  V.  marg.)  pre- 
sents the  added  sense  of  '  extending  over.'  That  this  righteousness 
does  not  come  to  all,  appears  from  the  qualifying  plirase  '  that 
believe' — For  there  is  no  distinction.  This  assigns  the  reason 
for  what  precedes.  There  is  no  other  way  for  any;  all  must  believe,  in 
order  to  obtain  this  righteousness.  There  may  be  no  other  points  of 
diiference  among  men,  but  as  respects  this  point  there  is  '  no  distinc- 
tion' made  in  God's  dealing  with  them. 

Ver.  23.  For  all  have  sinned.  The  Greek  tense  points  to  the  his- 
torical fact ;  they  became  sinners.  For  this  reason  there  is  no  distinc- 
tion. '  Have  sinned,'  is  not  altogether  objectionable,  since  it  implies 
a  relation  to  what  precedes. — Fall  short.  As  the  result  of  their 
having  become  sinners. — Glory  of  God.  This  is  variously  explained 
as,  glory  before  God,  glory  like  God  (in  His  image,  showing  His 
glory),  glory  from  God.  The  last  is  preferable;  His  approval  is 
meant  (although  it  is  true  this  glory  from  Him  alone  can  stand  before 
Him),  since  the  next  verse  closely  joins  the  thought  of  justification. 
Civilization,  refinement,  intelligence,  and  external  morality  have  not 
made  these  words  less  universal  in  their  application. 


3:  24,25.]  ROMANS  111.  63 

24  short  of  the   gioiy  of  God ;  being  justified  freely  by 
his  grace  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ 

25  Jesus ;  whom  God  ^ set  forth  ^  -to  be  a   propitiation, 

1  Or,  purposed.  *  Omit  niaigA — Am.  Com.  ~  Or,  to  he  propitiatory. 

Ver.  24.  Being  justified.  The  present  tense  points,  not  to  con- 
tinuous justification  of  tlie  individual,  but  to  an  action  continuous  as 
respects  those  spoken  of  in  (vers.  22,  23).  Because  they  are  all  in  this 
condition  (fallen  shorv  of  the  glory  of  God),  if  they  are  justified  it  is 
in  this  way,  namely,  freely,  as  a  gift,  not  by  their  own  merit. — By 
his  grace.  God's  grace,  i.  e.,  His  unmerited  favor.  His  love  to 
the  sinner,  is  the  efficient  cause  of  justification ;  this  led  to  the 
objective  mQuns,:  through  the  ledemption  that  is  in  Christ 
Jesus.  The  word  '  redemption  '  means  tirst  of  all.  release  or  deliver- 
ance of  captives  from  a  state  of  misery  or  danger  by  the  payment  of  a 
ransom  as  an  equivalent.  This  idea  of  a  ransom  price  paid  is  the  es- 
sential one  in  the  figurative  expression,  and  the  connection  not  only 
forbids  every  attempt  at  explaining  it  away,  but  points  to  the  his- 
torical person  who  paid  the  ransom  (Christ  Jesus)  as  well  as  to  the 
ransom  itself  (the  death  of  Christ).  Of  course  the  widest  sense  of 
redemption  includes  a  numl)er  of  blessed  truths;  but  the  reference 
here  is  specific,  and  the  idea  ot'  the  payment  of  a  price  is  confirmed 
by  a  number  of  similar  expressions  in  the  New  Testament.  Freedom 
from  sin  is  the  consequence  of  the  'redemption'  here  spoken  of,  but 
'the  redemption'  itself  is  an  essential  part  of  the  work  of  Christ. 
Hence  the  redemption  is  said  to  be  iti  Him,  not  through  Him ;  the 
next  verse  clearly  shows  that  the  reference  is  to  His  vicarious  death. 
'Every  mode  of  conception,  which  refers  redemption  and  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins  not  to  a  real  atonement  through  the  death  of  Christ,  but 
subjectively  to  the  dying  and  reviving  with  Him  guaranteed  and  pro- 
duced l)y  that  death,  is  opposed  to  the  New  Testament, — a  mixing  up 
of  justification  and  sanctification.'      (Meyer.) 

Ver.  25.  Whom.  The  personal  Redeemer  Christ.  Jesus  stands  im- 
mediately conntcied  Avith  justification;  how  is  here  declared  (vers. 
25,  26). — God  set  forth.  One  historical  fact  is  spoken  of.  The 
meaning  'purposed,'  which  the  original  word  has,  is  inappropriate 
because  the  purpose  is  expressed  in  detail  afterwards.  'Publicly 
set  forth  for  himself  is  the  full  sense  of  the  term  here. — To  be  a 
propitiation.  One  word  in  the  original,  but  something  nuist 
be  supplied  in  English:  'as,'  'for,'  'to  be,'  have  been  suggested, 
the  last  being  preferable,  because  a  fact  is  referred  to.  The  Greek 
•word  is  strictly  an  adjective,  meaning  '  propitiatory,'  but  is  used  in  the 
LXX.  as  a  noun,  usually  referring  to  the  mercy-seat  (kapporeth), 
the  lid  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant;  in  thissense  it  occurs  in  Hebrews 
9:5;  the  onlj'^  other  instance  of  its  use  in  the  New  Testament.  Ex- 
planations have  been  suggested:  (1.)  Mercy-seat ;  but  this  confuses 
metaphors ;  the  mercy-seat  was  hidden,  not  set  forth  ;  the  article  is 


64  ROMANS  III.  [3:  25. 

through  ^  faith,  by  his  blood,*  to  shew  his  righ- 
teousness, because  of  the  passing  over  of  the  sins 
done    aforetime,  in    the    forbearance   of    God ;    for 

1  Or,  faith  in  his  blood. 
*Kead  through  faith,  in  his  blood,  and  omit  marg.i — Am.  Com. 

wanting  ;  the  figure  is  nowhere  else  applied  to  Christ,  and  the  mercy- 
seat  was  designed  to  show  God's  grace,  not  'to  show  his  righteous- 
ness.' (2.)  In  consequence  of  these  objections  we  prefer  to  explain 
'a  propitiatory  sacrifice,'  either  taking  the  word  in  that  sense,  or  sup- 
plying the  noun.  This  amounts  to  the  same  as  the  other  explanation, 
but  is  not  open  to  the  same  objections.  (3.)  'To  be  propitiatory;' 
but  there  is  no  instance  of  the  adjective  being  applied  to  persons.  (4.) 
'As  propitiator;'  this  is  open  to  the  same  objection.  (5.)  'As  a 
means  of  propitiation ; '  this  is  too  abstract,  though  defended  by 
Weiss.  It  will  be  noticed  that  all  explanations  rest  on  the  thought  that 
Christ's  death  was  sacrificial  and  expiatory  ;  that  it  was  a  real  atone- 
ment, required  by  something  in  the  character  of  God,  and  not  merely 
designed  to  effect  moral  results  in  man.  We  may  not  know  all  that 
this  'propitiation'  involves,  but  since  God  Himself  was  willing  to  in- 
stitute a  system  of  types  and  an  extended  ritual  service,  designing 
thereby  to  educate  His  people  respecting  this  reality,  we  ought  to  know 
something  definite  and  positive  respecting  it.  The  atoning  death  of 
Christ  is  the  ground  of  the  'reconciliation'  (wrongly  translated 
'atonement'  in  chap.  5  :  11),  since  it  satisfies  the  demand  of  Divine 
justice  on  the  one  hand,  and  on  the  other  draws  men  to  God.  Inde- 
pendently of  the  former,  the  latter  could  not  be  more  than  a  groundless 
human  feeling. — Through  faith,  by  (in)  his  blood.  A  comma  is 
inserted  after  'faith.'  because  the  word  translated  'in'  is  never  joined 
with  'faith,'  and  because  the  important  phrase  'in His  blood,'  is  made 
too  subordinate  by  the  ordinary  punctuation.  'By'  is  far  less  exact 
than  'in.'  Further,  faith  in  Christ  is  more  than  faith  in  His  blood, 
(A.  V,  and  marg.  of  Eng.  Com.),  hence  the  Am.  Com,  prefer  to  render 
as  intlicated  above,  without  adding  any  margin.  We  join  'in  His 
blood'  with  'set  forth,'  etc.  This  setting  forth  of  Christ  as  a  propi- 
tiatory sacrifice  took  place  in  the  shedding  of  His  blood.  The  entire 
thought  is  purely  expiatory  ;  the  figure  is  that  of  doing  away  guilt  by 
blood;  the  reality  is  the  atoning  death  of  Christ,  which  actually  re- 
moves the  guilt  of  sin.  'Through  faith,'  (lit.,  'the  faith.'  pointing  to 
'faith'  already  mentioned  in  ver.  22)  maybe  connected  either  with 
'  propitiation,'  so  that  it  indicates  how  this  propitiation  becomes  ef- 
fective, or  with  '  set  foi'th,'  etc.  The  former  is  perhaps  preferable, 
since  the  propitiation  could  hardly  be  said  to  be  set  forth  through 
faith.  The  notion  that  'faith'  here  means  Christ's  faithfulness  is  al- 
together unwarranted. — To  she"w,  lit.,  *  unto  the  shewing,'  or,  de- 
monstration.— His  righteousness.       God's  judicial  (or  punitive) 


a:  26.]  ROMANS  III.  55 

26  the    shewing,    I  say,  of    his    righteousness    at    this 

righteousness.  His  retributive  justice  is  meant ;  the  death  of  Christ 
shows  howjie  hates  sin,  while  He  saves  sinners.  The  rest  of  the  vei'se, 
when  fairly  interpreted,  opposes  the  various  other  interpretations  — 
Because  of  the  passing  over  of  the  sins  done  aforetime. 
The  A.  V.  is  misleading.  This  clause  gives,  not  the  design,  but  the 
occasion,  of  the  showing  of  God's  righteousness;  'passing  over'  is  not 
the  same  as  '  remission.'  God  had  allowed  the  sins  of  the  race  which 
were  committed  before  Christ's  death  ( '  sins  done  aforetime'),  to  pass 
by  without  full  punishment.  He  had  not  forgiven  them  ;  the  wrath 
that  appeared  (comp.  chap.  1:  17)  was  not  a  sufficient  punishment; 
His  passing  over  these  sins  obscured  His  righteousness.  The  death  of 
Christ  as  an  atoning  sacrifice  showed  what  His  righteousness  de- 
manded, while  it  effected  pardon  and  justification.  That  this  is  the 
correct  view,  appears  not  only  from  ver.  26,  but  from  the  next  clause : 
in  the  forbearance  of  God,  which  explains  the  '  passing  over.' 
Remission  is  a  matter  of  '  grace  ; '  '  passing  over,'  of '  forbearance.'  To 
refer  the  latter  part  of  this  verse  to  actual  pardon  under  the  Old  Tes- 
ment  dispensation  is  contrary  to  the  obvious  sense  of  the  words,  how- 
ever true  it  is  that  the  Old  Testament  saints  had  remission  of  sins. 

Ver.  26.  For  the  shewing.  The  noun  is  the  same  as  in  ver.  25, 
but  a  different  preposition  has  been  chosen,  perhaps  for  euphony. 
This  verse,  however,  points  more  to  the  historical  demonstration,  ver. 
25  to  the  purpose. — Righteousness,  as  in  ver.  25. — At  this  pre- 
sent season,  when  the  historical  demonstration  has  taken  place,  in 
contrast  with  'aforetime,'  not  with  'in  the  forbearance  of  God.' — 
That  he  might  himself  be.  This  is  the  purposed  result,  the  final 
aim  of  the  whole  transaction.  'Himself  gives  an  emphasis  to  the  fiict 
that  it  is  the  personal  God  whose  character  is  to  be  displayed  ;  this 
alone  is  a  fitting  end.  'Might  be,'  in  this  connection,  is  equivalent  to 
'  might  be  shown  and  seen  to  be ;'  but  it  does  not  refer  merely  to  the 
human  estimate.  What  God  did  (ver.  25),  actually  had  as  its  purpose 
and  result  that  He  was  just  and  the  justifier,  etc.  Not  just  and 
condemning,  but  'just  and  justifying'  (the  comma  after  'just'  is  un- 
necessary). By  setting  forth  Christ,  in  His  blood,  as  a  propitiation, 
to  be  appropriated  by  foith,  God  not  only  demonstrated  His  judicial 
righteousness  which  had  been  obscured  in  past  ages,  but  also  and 
mainly  He  accomplished  this  purpose  and  result,  that  His  own  charac- 
ter was  displayed,  as  just  and  justifier,  as  righteous  and  accounting 
righteous  him  that  hath  faith  in  Christ.  Not  one  without  the  other ; 
not  one  in  contrast  with  the  other;  but  both  in  harmony.  Every  no- 
tion of  making  righteous  confuses  and  weakens  the  whole  passage,  but 
especially  in  this  jjhrase.  God  could  not  show  Himself  righteous  in  any 
simpler  way  than  by  making  men  righteous ;  the  gospel  paradox  is 
that  He  is  righteous  and  accounting  righteous  believing  sinners.  The 
fact  that  'righteousness'  in  the  immediate  context  refers  to  God's 
judicial  righteousness,  as  well  as  the  leading  thought  of  'propitiation,' 


56  ROMANS  III.  [3:  27. 

present  season :  that  he  might  himself  be  ^just,  and 

the   ^justifier    of    him    that   ^hath    faith    ^in    Jesus. 

27  Where  then   is  the  glorying?     It  is  excluded.     By 

what  manner  of  law  ?  of  works  ?     Nay :  45ut  by  a 

1  See  ch.  2:  13,  margin.  -  Gr.  is  of  faith.  s  Or,  of. 

combine  with  the  lexical  requirements  of  the  passage  itself  in  warrant- 
ing the  statement,  that  every  reference  to  sanctification  is  a  gratuitous 
importation,  the  result  of  theological  prejudgment.  Plain  facts  in  the 
history  of  God's  people  warrant  the  further  assertion,  that  such  an 
impoitation  ultimately  leads  away  from  God's  method  of  sanctification. 
—Of  him  that  hath  faith  in  Jesus  (see  the  more  literal  render- 
ings in  the  margin),  him  whose  essential  characteristic  is  faith.  The 
object  of  this  faith  is  'Jesus,'  called  here  by  His  human  name,  proba- 
bly with  tender  emphasis.  At  the  close  of  this  profound  passage  our 
thoughts  are  led  back  to  the  personal  Redeemer.  In  the  death  of 
Christ,  God  punished  sin  and  saved  the  sinner;  Divine  justice  was 
vindicated  in  the  culminating  act  of  redeeming  love.  The  Son  volun- 
tarily, and  in  accordance  with  the  holf/  love  of  the  Father,  assumed 
the  whole  curse  of  sin,  and,  as  the  representative  Head  of  the  human 
family,  in  its  stead  and  for  its  benefit,  satisfied  the  demands  of  Divine 
justice.  His  sacrifice  was  a  real  propitiation,  in  contrast  with  the 
types  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  design  was  that  God  might  right- 
eously account  the  believer  righteous.  To  this  view,  the  only  one 
exegetically  defensible,  it  has  been  objected  that  it  seems  to  conflict 
with  morality,  that  God's  design  is  to  make  men  holy;  but  the  suffi- 
cient answer  is,  that  the  sacrificial  death  of  Christ  has  taught  most  of 
God's  rigliteousne.ss,  that  God's  freely  accounting  men  righteous  has 
done  most  to  make  them  righteous. 

Ver.  27  "Where  then  is  the  glorying  ?  We  have  here  an 
inference  ('then')  vivaciously  set  forth  in  question  and  answer.  In 
view  of  this  manifestation  of  God's  righteousness  apart  from  the  law, 
the  Jew  cannot  boast.  Such  a  scheme  prevents  any  glorying;  but 
the  immediate  reference  to  the  Jew  is  clear  from  the  context,  as  well 
as  the  use  of  the  article.  The  Jewish  attitude  was  well  known,  and 
formed  a  great  hindrance  to  the  preaching  of  Paul;  hence  the  ques- 
tion is  not  abrupt.  'Glorying'  would  cover  both  the  good  and  bad 
senses  of  the  Greek  term,  which,  however,  has  here  the  bad  sense, 
namely,  'boasting.'  In  chap.  4:  2  another,  but  similar,  word  is  used. 
— By  what  manner  of  law  ?  This  refers  to  the  exclusion,  which 
must  have  taken  place  according  to  some  rule  or  principle  revealed  by 
God;  'law'  being  h(;re  used  in  its  widest  sense,  of  any  expression  of 
the  will  of  God. — A  law  of  faith;  i.  e.,  a  law  that  requires  faith. 
'  The  contrast  is  not  here  between  the  law  and  the  gospel  as  two  dis- 
pensations, but  between  the  law  of  works  and  the  law  of  faith,  whether 
found  under  the  law  or  the  gospel,  or  (if  the  case  admitted)  anj'where 
else.     This  is  evident  by  the  Apostle  proving  below  that  Abraham  was 


3:  28-30.]  ROMANS  III.  57 

28  law  of  faith.     ^  We  reckon  therefore  that  a  man  is 
justified  by  faith   apart  from  ^the  works  of  the   law. 

29  Or  is  God  the  God  of  Jews  only  ?  is  he  not  the   God 
of  Gentiles  also  ?     Yea,  of  Gentiles   also :  if  so   be 

30  that  God  is  one,  and  he  shall  justify  the  circumcision 

1  Many  ancient  authorities  read  For  we  reclon.  2  Or,  ivorks  of  law. 

Justified,  not  by  works,  so  as  to  have  -whereof  to  boast,  but  by  faith ' 
(Alford).  'If  we  were  saved  by  our  own  works,  we  might  put  the 
crown  upon  our  own  heads.  But  ihe  law  of  faith,  the  way  of  justifi- 
cation by  faith,  doth  forever  exclude  boastiug  .  .  .  therefore  it  is  most 
for  God's  glory,  that  thus  we  should  be  justified'  (Matthew  Henry). 

Ver.  28.  We  reckon  therefore.  The  R.  V.  puts  in  the  text 
the  reading  of  B,  C,  and  most  later  authorities.  The  marginal  read- 
ing is  supported  by  Aleph,  A.  D,  Vulgate,  etc.,  accepted  by  Tischen- 
dorf,  Westcott  and  Hort  (text).  The  latter  suggests  the  reason  for 
the  previous  assertion:  Glorying  is  excluded  by  the  law  of  faith,  for 
(we  have  already  proved  and  hence;  we  reckon,  etc.  The  common 
reading  makes  this  verse  an  inference.  'Reckon'  is  the  word  usually 
so  rendered;  'conclude'  is  incorrect,  in  any  case.— By  faith  apart 
from  the  works  of  the  law.  This  principle  has  already  been  es- 
tablished (vers.  21-20)  ;  and  is  re-^tated  here  to  furnish  a  basis  for 
the  argument  against  the  pride  of  the  Jew.  Luthei-  here  adds  'alone,' 
and  the  phrase  '  faith  alone'  has  been  a  watchword  of  evangelical 
Protestantism.  Certainly,  the  context  excludes  every  other  ground  of 
justification,  and  because  it  does  tliere  was  no  necessity  for  Paul's  wri- 
ting'alone,'  or  for  our  inserting  it.  'Ihe  eniplias-is  rests  on  'faith,' 
which  'is  the  alone  instrument  of  jusiiiication  ;  yet  it  is  not  alonein  the 
person  justified,  but  is  ever  accompanied  with  all  other  saving  graces, 
and  is  no  dead  faith,  but  wovketh  by  love'  (Westminster  Confession). 
On  'works  of  the  law.'  see  ver.  20. 

Ver.  20.  Or  is  God  the  God  of  Jews  only?  'Or,'  which  is 
omitted  in  the  A  V.,  presents  an  alternative,  in  case  the  principle  of 
ver.  28  should  be  doubted.  'Belong  to  .Jews  only'  is  the  full  sense. 
The  Jews  made  this  claim,  and  it  would  hold  good,  if  justification  were 
by  works  of  the  law,  since  the  Jews  alone  possessed  the  law. — Yea,  of 
Gentiles  also.  Paul's  position  as  an  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  the  re- 
velation of  the  universality  of  the  gospel  made  to  him,  confirmed  the 
promise  of  the  Old  Testament  (chap.  1  :  1-5).  Hence  all  this  estab- 
lishes the  position  of  ver.  28,  tlint  a  man  is  justified  by  faith. 

Ver.  80.  If  so  be  that  God  is  one,  etc.  A  slight  change  of 
reading  gives  the  sentence  a  lively  argumentative  form  ;  the  word 
used  being  the  same  as  in  chap.  8 :  9.  The  argument  is  pressed  fur- 
ther to  the  undoubted  fact  'that  God  is  one.'  'The  unity  of  God  im- 
plies that  He  is  God,  not  merely  of  the  Jews,  but  also  of  the  Gentiles ; 
for  otherwise  another  special  Deity  must  rule  over  the  Gentiles,  which 


58  ROMANS  III.  [3:  31. 

^  by  faith,  and  the    uncircumcision    ^  through  faith. 
31  *  Do  we  then  make  ^  the  law  of  none  effect  *  through 
faith  ?     God  forbid  :  nay,  we  establish  the  law. 

1  Gr.  out  of.  2  Or,  through  the  faith.  3  Or,  law.  *  Or,  by. 

*  Make  a  paragraph  of  ver.  31. — Am.  Co.n. 

would  do  away  with  monotheism'  (Meyer).  But  the  unity  of  God's 
being  involves  the  uniformity  of  His  method  of  justification.  If  God 
is  one,  there  can  be  no  contradictory  revelations  from  God ;  hence 
Christianity,  based  equally  with  Judaism  upon  monotheism,  cannot 
admit  of  being  one  among  several  religions  equally  true. — The  cir- 
cumcision by  faith,  and  the  uncircumcision  through  faith  ; 
lit.,  '  the  faith.'  The  change  from  '  by  faith'  to  '  through  faith,'  may 
not  have  been  designed  to  express  any  distinction,  as  Paul  frequently 
uses  the  two  phrases,  'by  faith'  and  'through  faith,'  as  if  they  were 
equivalent.  Some  distinguish  the  former,  as  giving  the  general 
ground  of  justification  (as  opposed  to  that  of  works)  ;  the  latter,  the 
particular  means,  through  his  faith  (as  opposed  to  want  of  faith).  To 
make  the  former  imply  a  different  position  on  the  part  of  the  Jew,  is 
to  oppose  the  whole  current  of  Paul's  thought. 

Ver.  31.  Do  we  then  make  the  law  of  none  effect  through 
faith  ?  This  verse  may  be  regarded  either  as  the  proposition  of  chap.  4, 
or  as  the  conclusion  of  the  preceding  argument.  It  is  both  in  fact, 
being  a  transition  from  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  to  the 
proof  that  Abraham  was  thus  justified.  The  objection  to  making  it  begin 
the  next  chapter  is  the  form  of  ver.  1  (which  see).  But  the  Am.  Com, 
properly  place  it  in  a  separate  paragraph.  The  article  is  wanting 
with  the  word  'law,'  but  the  reference  to  the  Mosaic  law  is  unmistaka- 
ble.— God  forbid.  The  Apostle  indignantly  denies  that  faith  abro- 
gates the  law,  as  might  be  objected. — Nay  ;  or,  'but  on  the  contrary,' 
■we  establish  the  law,  cause  the  law  to  stand.  Not  as  a  ground  of 
justification,  but  as  itself  teaching  justification  by  faith,  the  next  chap- 
ter giving  the  historical  proof.  This  is  the  main  point  here,  although 
there  are  many  other  reasons  which  might  be  urged  in  support  of  the 
statement  as  a  general  one.  The  law  was  never  intended  as  a  means 
of  justification  ;  it  could  not  therefore  be  abrogated  by  such  a  means. 
In  its  typical  character  it  has  fulfilled  its  purpose ;  as  to  its  moral  con- 
tents, as  the  expression  of  the  holy  will  of  God,  as  a  rule  of  conduct, 
it  was  perfectly  fulfilled  by  Christ  and  is  constantly  fulfilled  in  the 
holy  life  of  a  believer. 


4:  1.]  ROMANS  IV.  59 

Chapter  4:  1-25. 

Proof  from  the  case  of  Abraham,  that  Righteousness  is 
by  Faith, 

1      What  then  shall  we  say  ^  that  Abraham,  oui   fore- 

1  Some  ancient  authorities  read  of  Abraham,  our  forefalher  according  to  the  flesh  f 

2.  Proof  from  the  case  of  Abraham,  that    Riyhteousness  is  by   Faith, 
vers.  1-25. 

The  principle  of  faith,  as  the  universal  one,  does  not  make  void  the  law.  In  the 
truest  sense  it  is  by  this  principle  that  '  we  establish  the  law  '  (chap.  3  :  ol).  As  re- 
gards Abraham  himself,  the  ancestor  of  the  Jews  (ver.  1),  the  Scripmre  teaches  that 
he  was  justified  by  faith  (vers.  2-5) ;  this  accords  with  what  David  says  of  free  for- 
giveness (vers.  6-8)  as  well  as  with  the  fact  that  Abraham  was  justified  while  j'et  un- 
circnmcised,  and  thus  became  the  fiither  of  believers,  uncircumcised  and  circumcised 
alike  (vers.  9-12) ;  furthermore  the  promise  of  ihe  inheritance  of  the  world  came 
through  the  righteousness  of  faith,  not  through  the  law  (vers.  13-17).  This  is  further 
set  forth  by  a  description  of  Abrahams  faith  in  G^d's  omnipotence  (vers.  18-22); 
the  whole  matter  being  applied  to  the  case  of  all  believers  in  Christ  (vers.  23-25). 
Comp.  throughout  the  similar  argument  in  Gal.  3. 

Ver.  1.  What  shall  we  say  then?  'Then'  connects  with 
what  precedes,  but  the  exact  reference  is  open  to  discussion.  Meyer 
and  others  take  it  as  introducing  a  proof  of  chap.  8  :  31,  which  they 
consider  the  proposition  of  chap.  4.  The  objection  is  that  Paul  is 
proving,  not  the  agreement  of  the  law  and  the  gospel,  but  the  true 
method  of  justification.  It  seems  better  to  take  ver.  31  as  a  transition 
thought,  which  is  illustrated  in  this  chapter,  and  taken  up  again  in 
chap.  6,  and  to  find  here  a  proof  of  the  positions  set  forth  in  chap.  3 : 
28-30,  to  which  exception  might  be  taken  in  view  of  the  Divine  origin 
of  the  law. — Our  forefather.  This  is  the  better  supported  reading. 
— According  to  the  flesh.  This  may  mean,  according  to  natural 
descent,  or  it  may  have  the  ethical  sense,  according  to  his  sinful  hu- 
man nature  (see  chap.  7  ).  In  the  former  case  it  must  be  connected 
with  '  forefather,'  in  the  latter  with  '  hath  found.'  The  order  of  the 
common  Greek  text  favors  the  latter ;  while  the  besi  authorities  sus- 
tain a  different  order,  which  throws  the  emphasis  upon  '  hath  found,' 
but  separates  it  from  '  according  to  the  flesh.'  It  is  possible,  how- 
ever, to  join  it  with  the  verb,  even  while  accepting  this  reading,  and 
the  Am.  Com.  give  the  preference  to  this  view  of  the  construction  (so 
Weiss  also,  while  accepting  the  better  supported  reading).  The  sense 
then  is :  what  shall  we  say  then  that  Abraham  our  forefather  hath 
found  [i.  e.,  attained)  according  to  the  flesh  (i.  e.,  through  his  own 
natural  efforts  as  distinct  from  tlie  grace  of  God).  The  opposite  would 
be  'according  to  the  Spirit,'  according  to  the  working  of  the  Spirit  of 
God.    This  evidently  suits  the  context  much  better  than  the  other 


60  ROMANS  IV.  [4:  2,3. 

2  father  according  to  the  flesh,  hath  found  ?  *     For  if 
Abraham  was  justified  ^  bv  works,  he  hath  whereof  to 

3  glory ;    but    not   toward  God.     For   Avhat   saith   the 

*  Read  hath  found  according  to  the  fle>^h,  with  nicirg.  according  to  thejl.sh,  hath  found  f 
— A)n.  Com. 

1  Gr.  Out  of. 

view,  which  merely  adds  a  seemingly  unnecessary  definition  to  the 
word  'forefather.'  (The  margin  of  the  Eng.  Com.  refers  to  the  reading 
of  B,  which  omits  '  hath  found. ') 

Ver.  2.  For  if  Abraham  -was  justified  by  -works.  It  is  as- 
sumed that  he  was  justiiied,  but  the  Jews  held  the  opinion  that  he  was 
justified  by  works.  Notice  that  even  in  their  view,  justification  was  a 
matter  where  God's  verdict  was  concerned. — Whereof  to  glory  (not 
the  same  word  as  ia  chap.  3  :  27) ;  comp.  Gal.  6  :  4,  where  the  same 
phrase  occurs.— But  not  toward  God.  The  best  explanation  of 
this  concisely  expressed  passage  is:  '  If  Abraham,  as  the  .Jews  suppose, 
was  justified  by  works,  he  has  reason  to  glory  toward  God  (for  he 
could  claim  justification  from  God  as  "of  debt"),  but  he  has  no 
ground  of  glorying  toward  God  (and  hence  was  not  justified  by  works), 
for  the  Scripture  says  he  was  justified  by  faith  (ver.  3).'  Some  com- 
mentators, however,  following  the  Greek  fathers,  take  the  clause:  'but 
not  toward  God,'  as  implying  that  his  justification  by  faith  gives  him 
a  ground  of  glorying  toward  God,  but  the  supposed  justification  by 
works  would  give  him  only  a  ground  of  glorying  toward  men,  God 
having  nothing  to  do  with  it  except  to  acknowledge  it  as  justly  earned. 
The  objections  to  this  view  are  that  ver.  3  would  then  contain  a  refu- 
tation introduced  by  'but,'  not  'for;  '  that  it  is  not  like  Paul  to  admit 
any  ground  of  glorying  toward  men,  much  less  toward  God,  in  con- 
nection with  the  matter  of  justification. 

Ver.  3.  For  what  saith  the  scripture  ?  This  introduces  the 
Scriptural  proof  of  the  fact  that  Abraham  has  no  ground  of  glorying 
toward  God,  and  hence  of  the  main  position  that  the  Old  Testament 
teaches  that  justification  is  by  faith.  The  passage  quoted  is  Gen.  15: 
6,  cited  also  in  Gal.  3:  6;  Jas.  2:  23;  but  the  A.  V.  varies  the  form 
in  each  case.  The  New  Testament  citations  all  follow  the  LXX. :  And 
Abraham  believed  God,  and  it  was  reckoned  unto  him  for 
righteousness  (Heb. :  'And  He  reckoned  it  to  him  for  righteous- 
ness'). The  saying  was  with  reference  to  the  promise  of  an  heir,  as 
detailed  in  vers.  17-22.  This  believing  was  reckoned  unto  Abraham 
for  righteousness.  The  word  we  translate  'reckon'  occurs  eleven 
times  in  this  chapter,  and  is  represented  in  the  A.  V.  by  '  count,' 
'reckon,  'impute;'  elsewhere  in  this  Epistle  by  'account'  (so 
Gal.  3:6).  The  idea  of  putting  to  one's  account  is  obvious  ;  and 
the  full  expression  is  a  technical  one,  the  equivalent  of  God's  act  of 
justification.  '  That  is  transferred  to  the  person  and  imputed  to  him, 
"which  in  and  for  itself  does  not  belong  to  him'  (Cremer,  Ijib.  Lexicon'). 


4:  4.  O.J  ROMANS  IV.  61 

scripture?     And  Abraham  believed  God,  and  it  was 

4  reckoned   unto  him  for  righteousness.     Now  to  him 
that    worketh,  the   reward  is   not    reckoned    as    of 

5  grace,  but  as  of  debt.     But  to  him  that  worketh  not, 
but  believeth  on  him  that  justifieth  the  ungodly,  his 

The  following  explanations  attempt  to  avoid  this  sense  :  his  faith  was 
taken  into  account  with  a  view  to  making  him  righteous  ;  his  faith 
being  a  new  principle  of  obedience,  was  regarded  as  already  a  com- 
plete righteousness;  he  was  justified  on  account  of  the  merit  of  his 
faith,  not  through  his  faith.  But  all  these  are  opposed  to  the  proper 
sense  of  'reckon'  as  well  as  to  that  of  the  entire  phrase.  Further- 
more, they  are  opposed  not  only  to  the  line  of  Paul's  argument,  but  to 
the  facts  of  spiritual  experience  :  the  confusion  of  justification  and 
sanctification  has  invariably,  sooner  or  later,  led  to  a  decrease  of  holi- 
ness. As  respects  the  character  of  Abraham's  faith,  it  differs  from 
Christian  faith,  as  the  promise  differs  from  the  fulfilment  of  the  Gos- 
pel salvation,  and  as  hope  differs  from  fruition ;  but  the  essential  ele- 
ment in  both  is  unconditional  trust  in  God's  truth  and  mercy.  How 
far  Abraham,  in  thus  believing,  had  faith  in  a  Messiah,  we  cannot  tell. 
In  any  case,  his  faith  was  not  a  purely  subjective  matter  ;  it  rested 
upon  God,  real  and  revealed,  as  its  object,  and  the  contents  of  his 
faith  would  correspond  with  the  extent  of  the  revelation.  It  is  not 
for  us,  who  have  the  personal  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  the  object  of  our 
faith,  to  use  the  case  of  Abraham  as  a  proof  that  one  can  have  Chris- 
tian faith  and  yet  reject  Him.  Meyer  goes  so  far  as  to  say  :  'Abra- 
ham's faith  had  reference  to  the  divine  promise,  and  indeed  to  the 
promise  which  he,  the  man  trusted  by  God  and  enlightened  by  God, 
recognized  as  that  which  embraced  in  it  the  future  Messiah  (John  8  : 
5Gj.'  In  the  case  of  the  Christian,  the  object  of  faith  is  the  personal 
Messiah,  the  contents  of  faith  respect  His  person  and  work.  One  who 
believes  iu  Him  will  not  be  seeking  to  diminish  the  contents  of  His 
faith. 

Yer.  4.  No-w  to  him  that  worketh.  Vers.  4  and  5  illustrate 
ver.  3  by  a  general  contrast  of  the  two  ways  in  which  we  can  be  ac- 
counted righteous.  A  workman  whose  business  it  is  to  labor  for  hire 
represents  the  legal  method,  the  plan  of  making  one's  own  moral 
character  and  doings  the  basis  of  acceptance  with  God. — The 
reward ;  his  reward,  for  which  he-  works. — Not  reckoned  ;  this 
takes  up  the  verb  from  ver.  3,  but  without  emphasizing  it. — As  of 
grace,  but  as  of  debt ;  not  according  to  as  a  matter  of  favor,  but 
of  debt.  That  Abraham's  case  was  'of  grace'  is  so  plainly  implied, 
that  it  was  not  necessary  to  express  it,  especially  as  the  thought  is 
now  quite  general. 

Ver.  5.  But  to  him  that  worketh  not. — To  one  who  does  not 
work  for  hire.  The  statement  is  general,  including  Abraham,  but  not 
specifically  applied  to  him.— Believeth  on  him.     The  idea  of  trust- 


62  ROMANS  IV.  [4 :  6-8. 

6  faith  is  reckoned  for  righteousness.     Even  as  David 
also  pronounceth  blessing  upon  the  man,  unto  whom 

7  God  reckoneth  righteousness  apart  from  works,  saying, 

Blessed  are  they  Avhose  iniquities  are  forgiven, 
And  whose  sins  are  covered. 

8  Blessed  is  the  man  to  whom  the  Lord  will  not 

reckon  sin. 

fully  resting  as  is  suggested  by  the  original. — That  justifieth.  Here 
any  other  idea  than  that  of  accounting  righteous  is  forbidden  by  the 
connection. — The  ungodly  ;  the  ungodly  individual,  the  original  is 
in  the  singular.  The  word  is  chosen  to  present  a  strong  contrast  of 
'justifying,'  one  who  is  alienated  from  God  is  yet  accounted  righteous 
by  God. — His  faith,  etc.  Meyer,  while  insisting  that  the  merit  of 
Christ  always  remains 'the  meritorious  cause,  to  which  we  are  indebted 
for  the  imputation  of  our  faith,  objects  to  the  usual  view  that  the 
righteousness  of  Christ  is  imputed  to  us,  on  the  ground  that  thus  the 
subjective  apprehension  of  Christ  is  confounded  with  the  appre- 
hended Christ,  the  objective  ground  of  imputation.  But  the  next 
verse  speaks  of  God's  reckoning  righteousness  to  a  man,  and  the  pro- 
found discussion  at  the  close  of  chap.  5  points  more  directly  to  the 
imputation  of  Christ's  righteousness.  Comp.  the  Heidelberg  Cate- 
chism, Q.  60. 

Ver,  6.  Even  as  David  also.  The  confirmatox-y  illustration  now 
introduced  is  from  Ps.  32:  1,  2,  here  attributed  to  David.  There  is 
significance  in  the  feet  that  David  himself  was  a  sinner  who  had  been 
greatly  forgiven. — Pronounceth  blessing,  lit.,  speaks  the  con- 
gratulation, the  pronouncing  blessed.  The  quotation  is  of  forgive- 
ness, of  not  being  reckoned  a  sinner ;  but  the  Apostle  takes  this  as 
equivalent  to  the  Lord  reckoneth  righteousness.  '  It  is  implied  by  Paul, 
that  the  remission  of  sin  is  equivalent  to  the  imputation  of  righteous- 
ness, that  there  is  no  negative  state  of  innocence,  none  intermediate 
between  acceptance  for  righteousness,  and  rejection  for  sin  '  (Alford). 
— Apart  from  works.  Since  the  forgiveness  of  sins  is  here  indicated 
as  a  part  of  the  reckoning  of  righteousness,  this  reckoning  must  be 
apart  from  meritorious  works,  for  forgiveness  and  merit  are  opposed 
ideas. 

Ver.  7.  Blessed  are  they,  etc.  The  quotation  is  made  exactly 
from  the  LXX. — Whose  sins  are  covered.  The  idea  of  the  first 
clause  is  repeated  under  another  figure,  according  to  the  parallelism 
of  Hebrew  poetry.  Their  sins  are  hid  by  God  Himself,  which  is  the 
same  as  '  forgiven,'  *  not  reckoned.' 

Ver.  8.  Will  not  reckon  sin.  The  negation  is  very  strong, 
'will  in  no  wise  reckon.'  This  may  refer  to  the  final  judgment,  but 
more  probably  points  to  the  method  of  entire  forgiveness  (future  to 
David's  eye)  revealed  in  the  gospel. 


4:  9-11.]  ROMA.NS  IV.  63 

9  Is  this  blessing  then  pronounced  upon  the  circum- 
cision, or  upon  the  uncircumcision  also  ?  for  we  say, 
To  Abraham  his  faith  was  reckoned  for  righteous- 

10  ness.  How  then  was  it  reckoned  ?  when  he  was  in 
circumcision,  or  in  uncircumcision  ?     Not  in  circum- 

11  cision,  but  in  uncircumcision  :  and  he  received  the 
sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal  of  the  righteousness 
of  the  faith  which  he  had  while  he  was  in  uncir- 
cumcision :  that  he  might  be  the  father  of  all  them 
that  believe,  though  rhey  be  in  uncircumcision,  that 

Ver.  9.  Is  this  blessing  then,  etc.  '  This  pronouncing  blessed, 
then,  i^  it  upon,'  etc.  The  reference  is  to  David's  words.  The  infer- 
ence, in  the  form  of  a  question,  is,  that  this  declaration  of  blessedness 
affects  the  uncircumcision  also,  for  an  affirmative  answer  to  this 
clause  is  implied  in  the  form  of  the  original. — For  we  say,  (?.  e.,  in 
accordance  with  the  quotation  in  ver.  3).  This  begins  the  proof  from 
the  case  of  Abraham,  by  restating  the  Scriptural  fact.  The  further 
facts  and  conclusions  follow.  *  That '  is  properly  omitted  in  the  R.  Y. — 
To  Abraham,  etc.  The  emphasis  rests  on '  Abraham,'  as  the  emended 
order  indicates. — His  faith,  lit.,  '  the  faith,'  the  faith  just  spoken  of  in 
ver.  3. 

Yer.  10.  HoTv  then  was  it  reckoned  ?  Not,  what  was  the 
mode  in  which  it  was  reckoned,  but,  '  how  was  he  situated  when  this 
took  place  ? '  The  rest  of  the  vei-se  makes  this  clear. — Not  in  cir- 
cumcision, but  in  uncircumcision.  The 'reckoning'  took  place 
(Gen.  15:  6)  at  least  fourteen  years  before  the  circumcision  of  Abra- 
ham (Gen.  17  :  25)  ;  consequently  the  latter  was  the  Divine  ratifica- 
tion of  grace  already  received,  not  the  effective  cause  or  condition  of 
the  bestowal  of  grace. 

Yer.  11.  And  he  received  the  sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal, 
etc.  The  'sign'  wa.s  'circumcision,'  which  is  described  as  'a  seal,' 
etc.  Meyer  explains:  a  sign  which  was  given  him  in  the  fact  that  he 
was  circumcised,  he  received  as  seal,  etc.  In  Gen.  17:  11,  circum- 
cision is  represented  as  'a  token  (sign)  of  the  covenant'  God  made 
with  Abraham.  The  covenant  antedated  the  sign  (Gen.  15).  In  the 
Talmud  also,  circumcision  is  spoken  of  as  a  sign  and  seal  of  the  cove- 
nant.— The  righteousness  of  the  faith  -which  he  had  while 
he  vras  in  uncircumcision.  This  is  historically  correct,  and  doctri- 
nally  accurate.  Abraham's  faith  was  in  God  who  had  promised  him 
an  inheritance,  and  his  faith  was  then  reckoned  to  him  for  righteous- 
ness, this  being  a  part  of  the  story  of  the  covenant ;  when  afterwards 
circumcision  was  instituted  it  sealtd  the  promise  or  covenant,  and  not 
less  the  righteousness  reckoned  to  Abraham,  which  came  from  his 
faith.  The  true  idea  of  a  sacrament  is  here  suggested  :  it  is  a  sign, 
seal,  and  means  of  grace,  but  not  the  grace  itself.  Circumcision  is 
not  the  covenant ;  nor  is  baptism  regeneration.     The  sign  and  seal  is 


64  ROMANS  IV.  [4:  12,  13. 

12  righteousness  might  be  reckoned  unto  them ;  and 
the  father  of  circumcision  to  them  who  not  only  are  of 
the  circumcision,  but  who  also  walk  in  the  steps  of 
that  faith  of  our  father  Abraham,  which   he   had  in 

13  uncircumcision.     For  not  ^  through  the  law  was  the 

1  Or,  through  law. 

not  itself  the  ground  of  confidence,  but  it  testifies  and  openly  ratifies 
a  Divine  covenant  or  blessing.  If  Abraham  needed  a  seal  of  the 
righteousness  reckoned  to  him,  some  such  outward  sign  and  seal  may 
be  exp  cted  in  the  Christian  church. — That  he  might  be  the 
father,  etc.  This  was  the  end  of  his  receiving  a  sign  of  previous 
faith.  The  idea  of  spiritual  ftitherhood  liere  set  forth  is  quite  Bibli- 
cal, but  the  fullest  exposition  of  spiritual  sonship  of  Abraham  is 
found  in  Gal.  3.  '  They  that  are  of  faith,  these  are  sons  of  Abraham.' 
'Not  .Jews  and  proselytes  as  such,  but  the  belieA^ers  as  such — all  un- 
circumcised  who  believe,  and  (ver.  12)  the  believing  cii-cumcised ' 
(Meyer).  The  former  came  into  view  first,  because  this  was  the  main 
position  to  be  proved,  and  the  more  striking  inference  from  the  his- 
torical facts.— Though  they  be  in  uncircumcision;  a  correct 
paraphrase  of  the  original  expression,  which  is  literally  '  through  un- 
circumcision.'— That  righteousness  might  be  reckoned  unto 
them.  The  best  authorities  omit  '  also  ; '  which  would  suggest,  '  unto 
them  as  well  as  Abraham,'  but  is  quite  unnecessary.  This  clause 
presents  the  purpose  with  respect  to  the  individuals  who  believe 
though  uncircumcised.  It  is  parenthetical,  for  ver.  12  is  parallel 
with  the  preceding  clause. 

Ver  12.  And  the  father.  '  Father  '  is  repeated  to  take  up  the 
line  of  thought  slightly  interrupted  by  the  final  clause  of  ver.  11.  The 
full  idea  is  :  that  he  might  be  the  father,  etc.  -  Of  circumcision. 
Not  of  the  circumcision  as  such,  but  of  such  as  are  afterwards  further 
defined. — Not  only  are  of  the  circumcision,  but  Avho,  etc. 
The  Greek  is  peculiar,  but  the  sense  is  easily  p  rceived.  Abraham  is, 
indeed,  the  father  of  circumcision,  but  with  reference  to  those  Jews 
Avho  are  not  merely  circumcised,  but.  also  believe,  as  he  did.  The  con- 
nection of  the  last  idea  with  the  historical  facts  respecting  Abraham's 
faith  and  subsequent  circumcision  is  emphasized  in  the  phrase:  walk 
in  the  steps  of  that  faith,  etc.  The  sum  of  the  argument  is :  '  For 
Abraham's  righteousness  through  faith  was  attained,  when  as  yet 
there  was  no  distinction  between  circumcised  and  uncii'cumcised  ;  and 
to  this  mode  of  becoming  just  before  God,  independently  of  external 
conditions,  Christianity  by  its  "righteousness  by  faith"  leads  back 
again  and  continues  it'  (Meyer). — Which  he  had  in  uncircum- 
cision. The  form  of  the  original  closely  resembles  ver.  11 :  but  the 
order  is  slightly  changed.  The  emphasis  there  rests  upon  'in  uncir- 
cumcision'; here  on  'faith.' 

Ver.  13.     For  not  through  the  law.     This  order  is  required  by 


4:  14.]  ROMANS  IV.  65 

promise  to  Abraham  or  to  his  seed,  that  he  should  be 

heir  of  the   world,  but   through   the  righteousness  of 

14  faith.     For  if  they  which  are  of  the  law   be  heirs, 

faith  is  made  void,  and  the  promise  is  made  of  none 

the  emphasis  indicated  in  the  original.  'Through  law'  is  the  literal 
rendering,  but  this  verse  (comp.  ver.  15)  overthrows  the  view  that 
'  law '  without  the  article  does  not  mean  specifically  the  Mosaic  law.  The 
argument  is :  The  Mosaic  law  was  in  no  sense  the  ground  or  cause  of 
the  promise,  for  the  law  was  not  then  in  existence;  and  this  fact  is 
the  ground  of  the  position  of  Abraham  as  father  of  all  believers, 
whether  Gentiles  or  Jews  (vers.  11,  12 1.  Weiss  attempts  to  extend 
the  sense  of  the  word  '  law '  throughout  this  passage,  but  only  to 
weaken  the  force  of  the  historical  argument.  That  Paul  had  in  mind 
the  chronological  sequence  appears  clearly  from  the  fuller  argument 
in  Gal.  3.  The  phrase  '  through  the  law  '  must  not  be  narrowed  to 
'  through  the  works  of  the  law  ;  '  the  agency  of  the  Mosaic  law  is  abso- 
lutely denied. — Was  the  promise.  The  purport  of  the  promise  is 
afterwards  given.  -  To  Abraham  or  to  his  seed.  '  Or '  after  a 
negative  binds  two  words  closely.  The  promise  is  to  both  as  one. 
Here  'his  seed'  is  not  directly  referred  to  Christ,  as  in  Gal.  3 :  16,  but 
to  all  believers,  as  the  spiritual  descendants  of  Abraham  In  Gala- 
tians,  the  emphasis  rests  upon  the  fact  that  believers  form  a  collective 
unity  in  Christ.  — That  he  should  be  heir  of  the  world.  This  is 
Paul's  summing  up  of  various  promises  made  to  Abraham  for  himself 
and  his  seed  (Gen.  12:  7;  13:  14,15;  15:  18;  17:  8;  22:  17). 
The  Rabbins  understood  these  as  meaning  the  ultimate,  universal  sov- 
ereignty of  the  Messiah.  As  to  the  main  point  Paul  accepts  this  view, 
though  the  religious  significance  to  him  was  dififerent  from  the  Jewish 
conception.  The  same  idea  underlies  the  gospel  phrase,  '  kingdom  of 
heaven,  kingdom  of  God.'  The  promise  will  be  literally  fulfilled  when 
the  kingdoms  of  the  world  are  given  to  the  people  of  the  Most  High, 
and  Christ  returns  to  rule.  Dan.  7:  27:  ^latt.  5:5;  Rev.  11 :  15,  etc. — 
Through  the  righteousness  of  faith.  Gen.  15 :  6,  quoted  in 
ver.  3,  follows  the  first  promise ;  but  this  need  not  occasion  difficulty, 
for  the  promises  covered  a  long  period,  and  Abraham's  faith  began  at 
the  first  promise.     Comp.  Gen.  12:  1-3  with  Heb.  11 :  8. 

Ver.  14.  For  if,  etc.  The  proof  of  ver.  13  is  now  given  (vers. 
14—17),  from  the  nature  of  the  law,  and  the  consequent  necessity  of 
faith  as  the  ground  of  inheritance. — They  •which  are  of  the  la^w. 
Comp.  the  contrasted  idea,  chap.  3 :  26  ;  Gal.  3 :  7.  Those  who  be- 
long to  the  law  are  of  that  party  whose  religious  life  springs  from  the 
law,  and  who  are  legalists  in  character. — Faith  is  made  void,  is 
made  empty  and  continues  so,  there  is  no  use  of  it. — Of  none  effect. 
The  promise  is  made  permanently  invalid.  Why  so  ?  The  reason  is 
given  in  ver.  15. 

5 


66  ROMANS  IV.  [4:  15,  16. 

15  effect :  for  the  law  worketh  wrath ;  but  where  there  is 

16  no  law,  neither  is  there  transgression.  For  this  cause 
it  is  of  faith,  that  it  may  be  according  to  grace  ;  to  the 
end  that  the  promise  may  be  sure  to  all  the  seed ;  not 
to  that  only  which  is  of  the  law,  but  to  that  also  which 
is  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,  who  is  the  father  of  us  all 

Yer.  15.  For.  The  statement  that  faith  and  the  promise  would  be 
ignored,  if  the  inheritance  were  through  the  hiw,  must  be  true,  for  this 
reason. — The  law,  the  Mosaic  law,  as  in  the  entire  discussion. — 
■Worketh  -wrath.  The  wrath  of  God  is  meant,  else  the  next  clause 
would  have  little  pertinence;  moreover,  'wrath,'  in  the  New  Testament, 
in  the  vast  majority  of  Cases  refers  to  God's  wrath  against  sin.  The 
law  does,  indeed,  stir  up  the  wrath  of  man  against  God,  as  is  set 
forth  in  chap.  7:  5,  etc.,  but  the  train  of  thought  in  that  chapter  is 
aistinct  from  that  found  here.  Because  the  law  brings  about  wrath, 
it  cannot  be  the  ground  of  promise  (ver.  13). — But  where  there  is 
no  law,  neither  is  there  transgression.  'For'  was  substituted 
by  the  early  transcribers,  to  bring  out  the  connection  of  thought. 
Strictly  speaking,  this  part  of  the  verse  is  a  general  negative  state- 
ment, implying  the  positive  truth,  that  where  there  is  a  law,  there  is 
transgression  of  it,  thus  producing  a  more  pronounced  form  of  sin, 
upon  which  God's  wrath  is  vis. ted  ;  thus  the  law  '  works  wrath.'  The 
negative  form  is  probably  due  to  the  character  of  the  main  thought, 
the  promise  was  independent  of  law  (ver.  13).  'Transgression,'  the 
infraction  of  known  law,  is  one  form  of  sin,  but  does  not  include  all 
sin.  'Sins  without  positive  law  (chap.  5:  13),  are  likewise,  and,  in- 
deed, on  account  of  the  natural  law  (chap.  2 :  14),  objects  of  the 
divine  wrath  (see  1  :  18  ;  Eph.  2  :  3) ;  but  sins  against  a  given  law 
are,  in  virtue  of  their  thereby  definite  quality  of  transgression,  so  spe- 
cifically and  specially  provocative  of  wrath  in  God,  that  Paul  could 
relatively,  even,  deny  the  imputation  of  sin  when  the  law  was  non- 
existent.    See  on  chap.  5:   13'  (Meyer). 

Ver.  16.  For  this  cause.  An  inference  from  vers.  14,  15 
(though  some  refer  it  to  what  follows). — It  is  of  faith.  What? 
Not  the  promise,  but  the  inheritance,  in  view  of  the  contrast  in  ver. 
14.  The  full  idea  maybe  thus  expressed:  'the  heirs  are  of  faith.' 
— That  it  may  be.  The  present  is  preferable,  as  indicating  a 
continuous  result  which  is  purposed  by  God  in  making  men  heirs. 
*  As  the  law,  bringing  the  knowledge  of  guilt,  works  wrath,  so  the 
promise  awakening  faith,  manifests  God's  free  grace,  the  end  for 
which  it  was  given '  ( Alford). — To  the  end  that  the  promise  may- 
be (the  present  is  preferable  here  also).  This  is  the  purpose  of  God 
in  making  men  heirs  by  the  way  of  grace ;  His  free  unmerited  favor 
thus  makes  the  promise  sure  to  all  the  seed,  to  all  believers  (comp. 
vers.  11,  13),  not  to  that  only  which  is  of  the  law,  i.  e„  to  the 
believing  Jews,  but  also  to  the   believing  Gentiles,  who  are  described 


4:  17.]  ROMANS  IV.  67 

17  (as  it  is  written,  A  father  of  many  nations  have  I 
made  thee)  before  him  whom  he  believed,  even  God, 
who  quickeneth  the  dead,  and  calleth  the  things  that 

as  of  the  faith  of  Abraham  (vers.  10,  2b),  though  not  descended 
from  him.  TLftit  the  former  c-lass  includes  only  believ  ng  Jews  (not  all 
the  natur-il  se  d  of  Abraham,  as  Weiss  holds),  appears  from  the  fact 
that  the  Apostle  is  describing  the  'seed'  who  become  heirs  by  faith 
in  order  to  manifest  Grod's  grace.  That  justification  is  by  faitli,  not 
by  works  of  the  law,  has  already  been  pr  (Ved,  and  is  here  presup- 
posed. As  the  believing  .Jew  was  also  '  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,'  '  of 
the  law,'  the  contrast  respects  their  race,  not  their  way  of  obtaining 
the  promise.  This  is  the  same  in  both  cases  ('according  to  grace'), 
otherwise  it  would  not  be  sure  —Who  is  the  father  of  us  all. 
♦Reiterated  tcomp.  vers.  11,  12),  solemn  setting  forth  of  the  lather- 
liood  of  Abraham  for  all  believers  (2/a),  which  was,  indeed,  the  pith 
and  fundamental  idea  of  the  entire  argument  (since  ver.  9).'  Meyer. 
Ver.  17.  As  it  is  written.  Gen.  17:  5  is  here  quoted  from  the 
LXX.  In  view  of  the  connection  the  parenthesis  is  to  be  retained. — 
A  father  of  many  nations.  Comp.  the  significant  change  of  name 
(Abraham  =^  fatlier  of  a  nuiltitude)  for  which  this  phrase  gives  a 
reason. — Have  I  made  thee.  '  Appointed  or  constituted.  The  word 
denotes  that  the  paternity  spoken  of  was  the  result  of  a  special  ar- 
rangement or  economy.  It  would  not  be  used  to  denote  the  merely 
physical  connection  between  father  and  sou'  (Shedd).  Hence  the 
promise  was  of  a  spiritual  seed  from  many  nations.  The  pertinence 
of  the  quotation  thus  becomes  obvious. — Before  him  whom  he  be- 
lieved. This  is  to  be  joined  with  ver.  Id  :  who  is  the  father  of  us 
all,  not  physically,  but  spiritually,  in  the  sight  and  estimation  of  God, 
in  whose  sight  Abraham  believed.  Others  prefer  to  explain  in  the 
sight  of  God,  whom  Abraham  believed;  but  this  is  not  so  grammati- 
cal,— Who  quickeneth  the  dead,  etc.  Paul  thus  describes  God, 
because  of  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  Abraham.  His  omnipo- 
tence is  set  forth  in  the  first  phrase,  which  is  suggested  by  the 
condition  of  Abraham  and  Sarah,  mentioned  in  ver.  19. — Calleth 
the  things  that  are  not  as  though  they  were.  'Things 
that  are  not,'  relatively  non-existent,  as  the  original  suggests,  non- 
exi.stent  until  God  calls  them  into  being.  These  things  God  treats 
as  existent.  The  main  question  is,  whether  this  means  that  God 
creates  such  things,  or  that  in  His  decrees  of  Providence  He  disposes 
respecting  them,  just  as  He  does  respecting  things  already  in  exis- 
tence. The  word  '  call '  is  most  frequently  used"  in  the  former  sense, 
but  the  time  here  used  points  to  continuous  action,  which  accords  bet- 
ter with  the  latter  view.  Probably  both  senses  are  implied.  The 
phrase  thus  suggests  the  numerous  seed  of  Abraham  in  regard  to 
which  God  had  decreed  and  spoken  (Gen.  15  :  5)  while  they  were 
non-existent,  except  in  His  purpose.  Some  find  here  an  undercurrent 
of  reference  to  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles,  or  to  the  imputing  of 
righteousness  without  righteousness  ;  but  this  is  far-fetched. 


68  ROMANS  IV.  [4:  18-20. 

18  are  not  as  though  they  were.  Who  in  hope  believed 
against  hope,  to  the  end  that  he  might  become  a  father 
of  many  nations,  according   to   that  which   had  been 

19  spoken,  So  shall  thy  seed  be.  And  without  being 
weakened  in  faith  he  considered  his  own  body  ^now 
as  good  as  dead  (he  being  about  a  hundred  years  old), 

20  and  the  deadness  of  Sarah's  womb :  yea,  looking  unto 
the  promise  of  God,  he  wavered  not  through  unbelief, 

1  Many  ancient  authorities  omit  now. 

Ver.  18.  Who.  Abraham;  'who'  in  ver.  17  (referring  to  God) 
has  no  equivalent  in  the  Greek,  which  does  not  present  the  ambiguity 
of  our  version.  Vers.  18-22,  which  might  constitute  a  separate  para- 
grapli,  give  a  more  detailed  description  of  the  faith  of  Abraham  ; 
grammatically  this  verse  is  parallel  with  '  who  is  the  father  of  us  all ' 
(ver.  16).— In  hope  believed  against  hope.  Abraham's  belief 
rested  'upon  hope'  (the  literal  sense),  but  it  was  also  contrary  to 
hope,  /.  e.,  contrary  to  external  hope,  to  what  might  naturally  be  hoped 
for.  A  similar  antithesis  is  continued  throughout.  —  To  the  end  that 
he  might  become  father,  etc.  This  was  the  end  of  the  faith  of 
Abraham  in  God's  purpose.  It  is  not  merely  the  result,  nor  is  it  the 
purpose  of  Abraham,  nor  what  he  believed. — According  to,  etc. 
This  qualifies  'become,'  not  '  believed.'— Had  been  spoken  (Gen. 
15:  5),  before  the  promise  that  he  should  become  a  tatht-r  of  many 
nations  (Gen.  17:  5). — So,  i.  e.,  as  the  stars  of  heaven  for  multitule. 

Ver.  19.  And  without  being  -weakened.  This  clause  points 
to  a  result  which  might  have  been  expected,  but  did  not  occur. — In 
faith:  the  article  in  the  original  points  to  '  his  faith.'  -He  con- 
sidered his  o^wn  body.  The  best  manuscripts  omit  '  not '  in 
connection  with  '  considered,'  thus  giving  to  the  whole  passage  a  dif- 
ferent turn.  Although  he  took  all  these  adverse  circumstances  into 
the  account,  yet  he  wavered  not.  His  faith  might  have  been  weakened 
by  the  long  delay,  or  by  the  consideration  of  the  physiological  circum- 
stances which  made  it  seem  impossible  that  he  should  have  an  heir. 
This  negative  expression  in  regard  to  Abraham's  faith  prepares  for  a 
description  of  how  strong  his  faith  was.  '  Not '  was  pi-obably  inserted, 
because  the  passage  as  it  stood  seemed  to  cast  a  reflection  upon  Abra- 
ham.—Now  as  good  as  dead,  as  regards  the  hope  of  a  son,  in 
consequence  of  his  age,  he  being  about  a  hundred  years  old  : 
ninety-nine  in  exact  numbers.  Gen.  17:  1,  etc. — Deadness;  comp. 
Gen.  18  :  2.  These  passages  plainly  show  that  Abraham  '  considei-ed' 
this  state  of  things. 

Ver.  20.  Yea,  looking  unto,  or,  '  yet  with  regard  to,'  the  pro- 
mise of  God.  The  omission  of  'not'  in  ver.  19  makes  this  verse 
present  a  contrast  to  the  facts  there  stated,  which  Abraham  con- 
sidered.— He  wavered  not  through  unbelief,  or,  •  in  unbelief.' 


4:  21-23.]  ROMANS  IV.  69 

but  waxed  strong  through  faith,  giving  glory  to  God, 

21  and  being  fully  assured  that,  what  he  had  promised, 

22  he  was  able  also  to  perforin.     Wherefore  also  it  was 

23  reckoned  unto  him   for  righteousness.     Now  it  was 
not  written  for  his  sake  alone,  that  it  was  reckoned 

there  is  no  preposition  in  the  original,  and  either  phrase  is  allowable 
both  here  and  in  the  corresponding  phrase  of  the  next  clause.  The 
form  is  the  same  as  in  ver.  19  ('in  faith').  The  article  which  occurs 
in  the  original,  points  to  '  the  unbelief  which  might  have  been  ex- 
pected from  the  facts  which  Abraham  '  considered.' — The  instrumental 
sense. — Waxed  strong  through  (or, '  in  ' )  faith.  The  article  occurs 
here  also  in  the  original,  as  in  ver.  19. — Griving  glory  to  God.  While 
he  gave,  or  since  he  gave.  This  clause  is  to  be  closely  joined  with  the 
next  verse,  which  shows  how  he  gave  glory  to  God.  Not  words  of 
praise  alone,  but  every  action  that  tends  to  God's  glory,  may  be  inclu- 
ded in  the  phrase,  according  to  Scriptural  usage.  Here  the  recog- 
nition of  God's  omnipotence  is  meant. 

Ver.  21.  And  being  fully  assured,  etc.  This  simple  confi- 
dence in  God's  promise  gave  glory  to  God,  and  is  the  essence  of  faith 
(comp.  Gen.  18:  14,  and  Heb.  11  :  1).  '  Many  find  it  hardor  to  be- 
lieve that  God  can  love  them,  notwithstanding  their  sinfulness,  than 
the  hundred-years-old  patriarch  did  to  believe  that  he  should  be  the 
father  of  many  nations.  Confidence  in  God's  word,  a  full  persuasion 
that  He  can  do  what  seems  to  us  impossible,  is  as  necessary  in  the 
one  case  as  in  the  other.  The  sinner  honors  God,  in  trusting  His 
grace,  as  much  as  Abraham  did  in  trusting  His  power'  (Hodge). 

Ver.  22.  Wherefore  also,  etc.  The  whole  discussion  is  here 
summed  up,  the  last  clause  of  ver.  3  being  repeated.  The  immediate 
connection  is  with  vers.  18-21 ;  because  Abraham  had  believed  God  in 
the  way  there  described. 

Ver.  23.  Now  it  was  not  written  for  his  sake  alone.  The 
rest  of  the  chapter  states  in  plain  language  the  application  of  the  case 
of  Abraham  to  the  gospel  believers.  Thus  Paul  shows  that  God  is  the 
God  of  all  believers,  and  that  we  establish  the  law  through  faith  (chap. 
3:  28-31).  The  phrase  'it  is  written,'  which  occurs  here,  is  not  the 
usual  one:  it  denotes  the  past  historical  act  of  writing,  and  emphasizes 
the  design  of  God's  Spirit  in  causing  it  to  be  written ;  the  usual  phrase 
points  to  the  permanent  validity  of  the  Scriptural  quotation.  Here, 
as  throughout  the  Epistle,  the  Apostle  insists  that  the  whole  Old  Tes- 
tament pointed  to  the  uwversality  of  Christianity.  '  He  thus  touches 
one  of  the  strongest  internal  proofs  of  the  Divine  origin  of  the  revela- 
tions recorded  in  the  Bible,  namely,  the  one  spirit  which,  amid  a  great 
variety  of  outward  form,  breathes  throughout  the  whole'  (Beet). 

Ver.  24.  But  for  our  sake  also.  The  design  was  not  merely  to 
show  how  Abraham  was  justified,  but  also  to  show  how  we  should  be 
justified. — It  shall   be  reckoned.     'Shall  be'  is  not  the  simple 


70  ROMANS  IV.  [4 :  24,  25. 

24  unto  him;  but  for  our  sake  also,  unto  whom  it  shall 
be  reckoned,  who  believe  on  him  that  raised  Jesus 

25  our  Lord  from  the  dead,  who  was  delivered  up  for 
our  trespasses,  and  was  raised  for  our  justification. 

future,  but  points  the  purpose  of  God  witli  respect  to  what  is  continu- 
ous; the  justification  of  each  believer  is  a  single  act,  but  that  of  be- 
lievers as  a  whole  is  continuous. — Who  believe  ;  'since  we  are  such 
as  believe'  fairly  presents  the  sense. — Him  that  raised  Jesus  our 
Lord,  etc.  This  reference  to  the  resurrection  of  Chiist  emphasizes 
the  power  of  God,  just  as  ver.  17  has  done.  The  birth  of  Isaac  was  a 
proof  of  God's  omnipotence,  but  Christ's  resurrection  is  a  still  higher 
proof,  both  of  this  omnipotence,  and,  at  the  same  time,  of  Divine  grace, 
on  which  the  whole  argument  turns  (ver.  16).  When  the  fact  of 
Christ's  resurrection  is  denied  or  ignored  by  nominal  Christians,  their 
faith  is  weak  in  every  respect. 

Ver.  25.  Who  "was  delivered  up.  '  A  standing  designation  for 
the  divine  surrender  of  Christ,  surrender  unto  death  (chap.  8:  32), 
perhaps  after  Is.  53:  12.  It  is  at  the  same  time  self-surrender  (Gal. 
2:  20;  Eph.  5:  2),  since  Christ  was  obedient  to  His  Father'  (Meyer). 
— For  our  trespasses,  i.  e.,  our  sins  which  were  atoned  for  by  His 
sacrificial  death.  'For,'  that  is,  'on  account  of,'  but  not  in  exactly 
the  same  sense  in  both  clauses,  in  this  one  it  gives  the  cause,  namely, 
a  past  fact :  because  we  had  sinned  ;  in  the  next  clause  it  points  to  a 
future  result.  Christ  died  to  remove  our  guilt  which  already  existed, 
but  He  rose  again  to  accomplish  our  justification  which  could  not 
otherwise  take  place.— Raised  for  our  justification.  This  clause 
presents  the  positive  aspect  of  the  same  exhibition  of  grace.  The  word 
'justification.'  points  to  the  act,  though  the  state  (of  being  justified) 
which  results  may  be  implied.  By  His  death  our  Lord  atoned  for  siu 
(chap.  3:  25),  and  secured  our  pardon  and  peace;  this  is  the  merito- 
rious ground  of  our  justification  (comp.  chaps.  3:  24,  25;  5:  9;  2 
Cor.  5:9;  Eph.  1:  7;  1  John  1:  7).  But  unless  Christ  had  risen, 
the  atoning  work  could  not  have  been  appropi'iated  by  men,  and  their 
justification  actually  taken  place.  Without  the  resurrection,  Christ's 
grave  would  be  the  grave  of  all  our  hopes  (1  Cor.  15:  17).  That  great 
fact  testified  that  God  accepted  the  atoning  sacrifice.  If  man  had  not 
sinned,  Christ  would  not  have  died  ;  if  Christ  had  sinned,  He  would 
not  have  been  raised.  To  this  may  be  added,  as  matters  vitally  con- 
nected with  the  words  of  this  verse  (though  not  fully  expressed),  that 
only  the  risen  Saviour  could  intercede  for  us,  could  send  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  apply  redemption  to  us ;  that  as  the  death  and  resurrection 
of  Christ  are  inseparably  connected  as  the  ground  of  our  salvation,  so 
the  effects  are  indivisible,  though  distinguishable.  The  sinner  cannot 
be  buried  with  Christ,  without  rising  with  Him  as  a  new  creature ; 
the  death  with  Christ  is  inseparable  from  the  new  life  in  Christ. 
Hence  some  commentators  regard  this  verse  as  a  brief  introduction  of 


5:  1.]  ROMANS  V.  71 

Chapter  5  :  1-11. 

The  Blessed  Inward  Condition  of  the  Justified, 

1    Being  therefore  justified  ^  by  faith^  ^let  us  have*  peace 

1  Gr.  out  of.  -  Some  authorities  read  we  have. 

*  Read  TT'e  have,  and  in  the  marg.  Many  ancient  authorities  read  lei  %is  have. — 
Am.  Com. 

'the  great  subject  of  chaps.  5-8,  Death,  as  connected  with  Sin,  and 
Life,  as  connected  with  Righteousness'  (Alford).  See  beginning  of 
next  section. 

Chapters  5-8. 

III.  The  Gospel  the  Power  of  God  unto  Salvation. 

In  this  third  division  of  the  doctrinal  part  of  the  Epistle,  the  Apostle  presents  the 
gospel  as  'the  power  of  God  unto  salvation,'  setting  forth  how  God's  power  becomes 
efBcient  in  men,  as  the  result  of  gratuitous  justification.  Death  is  shown  to  be  con- 
nected with  Sin,  and  Life  with  Righteousness. 

Chap.  .5  treats  of  the  immediate  result  of  justification,  peace  with  God  (5  :  1,  11)  en- 
forced by  the  parallel  and  contrast  between  the  relartions  to  the  first  and  second  Adam 
(5  :  12-21).  Chaps.  G-8  treat  of  the  moral  results  of  justification  ;  namely,  sanctifica- 
tion.  As,  however,  the  Apostle  has  shown  the  need  of  justification  by  faith  from  the 
guilt  of  all,  so  he  shows  the  need  of  sanctification  by  the  gospel  method,  by  present- 
ing the  failure  of  the  law  to  sanctify  ichaps.'e,  7),  before  passing  to  the  positive  state- 
ments of  chap.  8.  (There  is  therefore  good  ground  for  the  view  which  regard.s  chaps. 
3:  21-5  as  tTeatin?^  of  justification  and  chaps.  6-8  of  snncfificatlon.)  At  the  same  time 
the  course  of  thought  is  not  that  of  a  formal  treatise ;  the  Apostle,  writing  a  letter  to 
Christians,  follows  to  a  gi-eat  extent,  the  order  of  Christian  experience,  taking  up 
difficulties  as  they  are  presented  in  the  Christian  life.  The  apparent  exception  to  this 
is  in  chap.  5 :  12-21,  where  we  find  a  parallel  and  contrast  between  Adam  and  Christ. 
But  even  this  is  not  an  exception,  for  thus  the  connection  between  sin  and  death,  and 
righteousness  and  life  is  set  forth  in  its  most  extended  form,  while  thus  grace  is  shown 
to  abound,  and  the  gratuitous  nature  of  justification  enforced  for  the  comfort  of  the 
believer.  Moreover  this  apparent  digression  is  but  a  more  pronounced  example  of 
what  occurs  in  well-nigh  every  section  of  the  Epistle.  Chap.  6  takes  up  an  objection, 
which  constantly  recurs :  will  not  this  abounding  grace  allow  men  to  continue  in 
sin  ?  Paul  answers,  that  Christians  have  a  fellowship  of  life  with  Christ,  are  dead  to 
sin  and  dedicated  to  God.  Moreover,  they  are  thus  freed  from  the  Inw  (chap.  7  :  1-6). 
This  thought  suggests  another  objpction  'as  constantly  recurring  as  the  previous  one) ; 
■will  not  freedom  from  the  law  lead  to  continued  sin?  The  Apostle,  in  reply,  defends 
the  spirituality  of  the  law  (chap.  7  :  7-12),  but  shows  that  it  is  not  the  power  of  God 
unto  salvation  (chap  7 :  13-25).  In  the  experience  he  portrays,  the  prominent  dis- 
tinction is  between  law  and  grace,  not  sin  and  grace.  This  part  of  the  Epistle,  so  far 
from  being  adapted  for  Jewish  readers  only,  or  for  that  age  alone,  is  the  part  which 
touches  our  expei-ience  most  closely.  The  antithesis  between  law  and  grace  is  one 
constantly  felt ;  the  Christian  is  in  constant  danger  from  legalism ;  and  few  have 


72  ROMANS  V.  [5:1. 

learned  to  syirpathize  with  the  joyous  utterances  of  chap.  8  without  having  proved  in 
their  own  case  that  the  law  as  a  means  of  sanctification  leads  to  wretchedness  (chap. 
7  ;  24),  quite  as  truly  as  it  fails  to  justify.  Chap.  8  presents  the  work  of  the  Spirit 
over  against  the  failure  of  the  law,  showing  the  happy  condition  of  the  justified  man, 
in  the  freedom  of  the  new  life,  the  conscioiusness  of  adoption  and  the  assurance  of 
future  glory. 

1.  The  Blessed  Inward  Condition  of  the  Justified,  vers.  1-11. 
Justification  has  as  its  proper  result  peace  with  God  (ver.  1),  which  becomes  hope  of 
the  glory  of  God^ver.  2),  is  actually  increased  by  tribulation  (vers.  3,  4),  because  of 
God's  love  (ver.  5).  This  love  is  assured  by  the  vicarious  death  of  Christ  (vers.  6,  8) : 
and  this  is  a  proof  and  pledge  that  reconciled  fiuners  will  be  'saved  in  His  life  '  (vers. 
9,  10),  and  may  glory  in  God  who  through  Christ  provides  their  reconciliation 
(ver.  11). 

Ver.  1.  Being  therefore  justified.  The  connection  is  with 
chap.  4:  25,  but  through  this  with  the  whole  argument  in  the  second 
division  (chaps.  3  :  21  ;  4 :  25).  The  single  act  of  justification  is  in- 
dicated in  the  original.  The  sense  '  make  righteous,'  is  altogether  in- 
appropriate here,  destroying  the  whole  force  of  the  Apostle's  inference 
— Let  us  have  (Eng.  Com.),  or,  -we  have  (Am.  Com).  The  two 
senses  are  represented  in  Greek  hy  two  forms  of  the  same  verb,  which 
diifer  only  in  a  single  letter  (long  or  short  o).  The  weight  of  authorities 
is  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  form  which  must  be  translated,  '  let  us  have.' 
But  there  are  considerations  which  weigh  in  favor  of  the  other  read- 
ing: (1.)  The  early  transcribers  frequently  interchanged  long  and 
short  o;  (2.)  The  form  'let  us  have,'  ifonce  occurring,  would  be  retained, 
because  the  doctrine  of  justification  was  early  obscured,  andthis  form  is 
not  so  confident  as  the  other;  (3.)  the  exhortation  seems  inappropriate 
here.  These  reasons  are  so  strong,  that  many  who  would  not,  in 
other  cases  hesitate  to  give  way  to  mf>nusciipt  authority,  here  retain 
the  reading :  'we  have.'  So  the  Am.  Com.,  with  the  other  reading 
in  the  margin.  '  Let  us  have  peace'  is  to  be  explained,  let  us  have  it  in 
full  measure,  let  us  appropriate  what  God  has  provided  for  us  ;  com^p. 
Heb.  12:  28.  The  sense  of  vers,  2  and  3  is  affected  by  this  read- 
ing.— Peace  with  God.  Not,  '  toward  God.'  We  are,  as  a  result 
of  justification,  no  longer  under  condemnation  (chap.  8:  1):  God  is 
at  peace  with  us.  Our  feeling  towards  Him  may  and  ought  to  corres- 
pond ;  but  it  is  subject  to  change.  God's  relation  to  us  is  the  great 
matter ;  on  that  is  based  true  peace  of  conscience,  (Nor  is  this  the 
less  true,  if  Paul  wrote  'let  us  have  peace,'  for  this  exhortation,  in 
the  connection,  could  only  mean  :  let  us  accept  and  possess  what  God 
has  provided  for  us.)  When  God  has  accepted  the  believing  sinner  as 
righteous,  He  looks  at  him  as  in  Christ,  who  is  our  Peace  (Eph.  2  : 
14-16).  The  hindrance  to  peace  has  been  removed  by  the  death  of 
Christ ;  God's  wrath  against  our  sin  is  removed.  Peace  that  does  not 
rest  upon  this  great  fact  is  a  dream  and  a  delusion, — Through  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.     This  full  form  gives  a  tone  of  triumph  to  the 


5  :  2,  3  ]  ROMANS  V.  73 

2  with  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  through 
whom  also  we  have  had  our  access  ^  by  faith  into  this 
grace  wherein  w^e  stand  ;  and  ^  let  us*  ^rejoice  in  hope  of 

3  the  glory  of  God.  And  not  only  so,  but  "^let  us*  also 
^rejoice  in  our  tribulations  :  knowing  that  tribulation 

1  Some  ancient  authorities  omit  by  faith.  ^  Or,  we  rejoice.  ^  Gr.  glory. 

*  Or,  toe  also  rejoice. 
*  Instead  of  let  iw,  read  we  (comp.  ver.  1)  omitting  marg.  2  and  *.—Am.  Com. 

verse.  This  personal  Lord  has  made  peace,  satisfied  justice,  removed 
the  curse,  made  it  possible  for  a  holy  God  to  be  righteous  in  account- 
ing righteous  those  who,  by  nature  and  character,  are  sinners.  God  is 
love,  He  first  loved  tlie  world,  but  loved  it  in  this  way,  that  He  gave 
His  only  begotten  Son  (John  3  :  16) ;  through  this  Son  of  His  love 
we  have  peace  with  God. 

Ver.  2.  Through  -whom.  The  Personal  Redeemer  is  kept  in  the 
foreground. — "We  have  had  ;  have  obtained  as  our  own. — Our 
(lit.,  '  the  ')  access.  (Some  prefer  to  render  the  term  '  introduction.') 
This  access  is  the  result  of  justification  and  the  ground  of  peace.  We 
have  peace,  because  at  the  time  of  our  justification  we  obtained  as  our 
possession  this  access  into  this  grace. — By  faith.  Some  important 
manuscripts  omit  this,  but  the  probabilities  favor  its  genuineness. 
Paul  constantly  presents  the  Personal  Redeemer,  but  is  ever  reminding 
his  readers  that  by  faith  we  appropriate  what  He  has  done  for  us. — 
Into  this  grace,  i.  e.,  the  state  of  justification,  which  is  pre- 
eminently a  position  of  'grace,'  wherein  "we  stand,  have  our  per- 
manent position,  as  accepted  of  God. — Let  us  rejoice,  or,  we 
rejoice.  The  form  here  (and  in  ver.  3)  may  be  either  imperative  or 
indicative  ;  but  as  the  sentence  corresponds  with  the  beginning  of  ver. 
1,  we  must  translate  in  accordance  with  the  reading  there.  (The  A. 
V.  gives  the  impression  that  'stand  and  rejoice'  are  closely  connec- 
ted.) The  word  itself  means  to  glory,  boast,  triumph,  rejoice, 
exult.  The  firsjt  is  the  usual  rendering,  but  is  infelicitous  here,  where 
'glory'  (another  word  in  the  Greek)  immediately  follows.  (So  ver.  3 
in  A.  V. ) — In  hope  of  the  glory  of  God.  The  ground  of  rejoic- 
ing is  the  hope  of  sharing  in  that  glory  which  belongs  to  God  ;  comp. 
John  7:  22;  1  Thess.  2  :  12;  1  John  3:2;  Rev.  21 :  11.  That  God  will 
give  this  glory  is  implied,  rather  than  expressed.  The  Roman  Catho- 
lic doctrine  of  the  uncertainty  of  salvation  is  opposed  to  this  trium- 
phant assurance  of  faith.  We  may,  however,  distinguish  between 
assurance  of  a  present  state  of  grace,  which  is  implied  in  true  faith, 
personally  apprehending  Christ  as  a  Saviour,  and  assurance  of  future 
redemption,  which  is  an  article  of  '  hope,'  to  be  accompanied  by  con- 
stant watchfulness. 

Ver.  3.  And  not  only  so;  not  only  do  we  rejoice  (or,  let  us) 
rejoice  in  the  hope  of  glory;  but  let  us  (or,  we)  also  rejoice  in 
our  tribulations.     The  construction  is  the  same  as  in  ver.  2.     '  In ' 


74  ROMANS  V.  [5 :  4,  5. 

4  worketh  patience ;  and  patience,  probation  ;  and  pro- 

5  bation,  hope:  and  hope  putteth  not  to  shame;  because 
the  love  of  God  hath  been  shed  abroad  in.  our  hearts 
through  the  ^  Holy  Ghost  which  was  given  unto  us. 

1  Or,  Holy  Spirit :  and  so  throughout  this  book. 

is  not  the  same  word  as  tbai  used  ia  ver,  2  ;  there  the  '  hope '  was 
the  direct  ground  of  the  glorying,  here  the  '  tribulations '  are  the 
indirect  ground,  since  they  become  the  means  of  sanctification.  '  Our 
ti'ibulations,'  lit,.,  '  the  tribulations,'  which  Christians  then  knew 
so  well.  Lord  Bacon  says :  '  Prosperity  is  the  blessing  of  the 
Old  Testament,  adversity  of  the  New.'  '  Christians  do  not  glory 
in  suifering,  as  such,  or  for  its  own  sake  ;  but  as  the  Bible 
teaches:  1.  Because  they  consider  it  an  honor  to  suffer  for  Christ.  2. 
Because  they  rejoice  in  being  the  occasion  of  manifesting  His  power 
in  their  support  and  deliverance ;  and,  3.  Because  suffering  is  made 
the  means  of  their  own  sanctification  and  preparation  for  usefulness 
here,  and  for  heaven  hereafter.  The  last  of  these  reasons  is  that  to 
which  the  Apostle  refers  in  the  context'  (Hodge). — Knowing  that, 
since  we  know  that ;  the  believer  finds  this  out  in  his  own  experience. 
This  knowledge  extends  to  the  whole  series  of  successive  results  ;  the 
climax  is  set  forth  in  ver.  5. — Worketh  patience.  Not  'patience  ' 
as  we  generally  understand  it,  but  '  constancy,'  patient  endurance, 
steadfastness,   holding   out   bravely  against   trials   and  persecutions. 

Ver.  4.  Probation.  '  Experience '  is  too  wide,  since  it  may  include 
the  whole  Christian  life.  The  term  here  used  refers  to  the  state  of  one 
who  has  successfully  stood  a  test.  In  itself  it  might  refer  to  the  act  of 
testing  (2  Cor.  8  :  2),  but  here  the  result  is  evidently  meant.  The  ren- 
dering of  the  R.  V.  is  not  very  happy,  but  no  English  word  exactly 
answers  to  the  Greek  term. — Hope.  As  in  ver.  2,  'hope  of  the 
glory  of  God.'  But  while  this  hope  precedes  the  '  approval,'  in  an 
increased  measure  it  is  the  further  result  of  the  approval.  *  The 
more  the  Christian  has  become  tried,  the  more  also  will  hope  continu- 
ally possess  him'  (Meyer).  Like  faith  and  love,  and  every  other 
Christian  grace,  hope  is  never  done  in  this  world,  but  always  growing. 
Every  enlaro^ement  of  Christian  life  enlarges  this  also. 

Ver.  5.  Putteth  not  to  shame.  Ii  will  not  disappoint  or  mock 
us;  it  even  now  gives  triumphant  certainly. — Because  God's  love. 
'The  love  of  God,'  while  more  literal,  is  ambiguous;  the  Apostle 
means  the  love  God  has  toward  us.  We  are  assured  that  hope  shall 
not  put  us  to  shame,  not  by  anything  in  ourselves,  but  because  of  the 
love  of  God.  This  love  has  been  outwardly  manifested  and  inwardly 
given  to  us:  hath  been  shed  abroad  (/.  e.,  'poured  out')  in  our 
hearts.  '  The  love  of  God  did  not  descend  upon  us  as  dew  in  drops, 
l»nt  as  a  stream  which  spreads  itself  through  the  whole  soul,  filling  it 
with  a  consciousness  of  His  love  and  favor'  (Philippi). — Through 
the  Holy  Ghost  which  was  given   unto   us.     The  outward 


5 :  6,  7.]  ROMANS  V.  75 

6  For  while  we  were  yet  weak,  in  due  season  Christ 

7  died  for  the  ungodly.     For  scarcely  for  a  righteous 
man   will  one  die :  for  perad venture  for  ^  the  good 

1  Or,  that  ichich  is  good. 

manifestation  of  God's  love  is  through  Christ  (ver.  8),  but  the  inward 
(and  abundant)  experience  of  it  as  ours  comes  only  through  the  Holy 
Ghost,  '  Was  given'  points  to  a  single  bestowal ;  not,  however,  to  the 
outpouring  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  since  this  could  not  apply  to  Paul 
himself,  but  to  the  gift  of  the  Spirit  at  the  time  of  the  regeneration  of 
each  Christian. 

Ver.'ti,  For.  This  introduces  the  outward  proof,  or  manifestation, 
of  the  love  of  God,  the  same  love  which  hath  been  poured  out  in  our 
hearts  through  the  Holy  Ghost  (ver.  5).  But  the  internal  experience 
would  be  a  delusion,  were  it  not  based  on  this  historical  fact,  in  which 
God's  love  was  specially  displayed.  —"While  -we  "were  yet  weak, 
i.  e.,  spiritually  weak,  without  the  Holy  Spirit,  through  which  we 
must  receive  spiritual  life.  '  The  sinfulness  is  purposely  described  as 
weakness  (need  of  help),  in  order  to  characterize  it  as  the  motive  for 
the  love  of  God  interfering  to  save '  (Meyer).  'Yet'  is  repeated  in 
the  original,  according  to  the  best  manuscripts,"  and  thus  receives  an 
emphasis  which  we  can  scarcely  reproduce  in  English.  —  In  due 
season.  At  the  proper  season,  which  was  also  the  appointed  time. 
Christ  appeared  when  all  the  preparations  for  His  coming  were  com- 
plete, and  when  the  disease  of  sin  had  reached  its  crisis.  It  Avas, 
therefore,  the  'due  season,'  and  in  Paul's  mind  the  death  of  Christ 
was  the  central  point  of  all  human  history  (comp.  Gal.  4:  4). — Died 
for  the  ungodly.  The  term  '  ungodly '  is  chosen  rather  than  '  us,' 
which  would  have  been  otherwise  correct,  to  bring  out  more  forcibly 
the  strength  of  God's  love.  'For,'  in  itself,  means  'in  behalf  of;'  but 
'  where  the  question  is  concerning  a  dying  for  those  who  are  worthy 
of  death,  the  conception  naturally  involves  a  well-understood  "in- 
stead of;"  see  Matt.  20:  28'  (Lange).  The  doctrine  of  the  substitu- 
tionary death  of  Christ  (His  vicarious  atonement)  rests,  not  on  the 
preposition,  but  on  the  context,  on  the  whole  sweep  of  Bible  thought, 
and,  as  far  as  Paul's  view  is  concerned,  on  such  passages  as  chap,  3 : 
25;  Eph.  5:  2;   1  Tim.  2:  6. 

Ver.  7.  For.  This  death  of  Christ  for  the  ungodly  shows  the 
greatness  of  God's  love  (comp.  ver.  8),  since  among  men  it  is  true 
that  scarcely  for  a  righteous  man,  still  less  for  the  '  ungodly.' 
"Will  one  die.—  For  peradventure ;  not,  'yet.'  The  Apostle  adds 
another  confirmatory  clause,  which  admits  the  possibility  of  some  one 
dying  for  the  good  man.  The  exact  sense  is  open  to  discussion. 
Explanations:  (1.)  that  there  is  no  distinction  between  'righteous' 
and  'good,'  so  far  as  the  Apostle's  argument  is  concerned,  the  second 
clause  bringing  out  the  thought  of  the  first  in  another  form,  more 
with  reference  to  the  possibility  of  such  rare  cases,     (2.)  That  'the 


ROMANS  V.  [5  :  8,  9. 


8  man  *  some  one  would  even  dare  to  die.     But  God 
commendeth  his  own  love  toward  us,  in  that,  while 

9  we  were  yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us.     Much  more 

*  Omit  marg.  ^. — Am.  Com. 

good  man '  means  one  who  is  a  benefactor,  or  who  has  a  noble,  ad- 
mirable, kind  character,  not  merely  a  just  one.  This  is  the  usual 
view,  though  the  presence  of  the  article  is  variously  explained.  'A 
righteous  man,'  fulfilling  all  just  demands,  calls  forth  respect  and  ad- 
miration;  but  'the  good  man,'  himself  prompted  by  love,  evokes  our 
love,  and  for  him  some  one  "would  even  dare  to  die.  (3.)  The 
marginal  rendering  of  the  Eng.  Com.  :  'that  which  is  good,'  is  very 
flat,  and  quite  unlikely  in  a  discussion  Avhere  persons  are  so  con- 
stantly in  mind.     Hence  the  Am.  Com.  leject  iV. 

Ver.  8.  But  God  commendeth,  or,  'doth  establish'  (comp. 
chap.  3:  5).  Probably  both  meanings  are  included;  the  proof  is  of 
such  a  character  as  to  render  the  love  conspicuous,  and  thus  to  '  com- 
mend' it.  The  word  has  an  emphatic  position  in  the  original.  The 
present  tense  is  used,  because  the  atoning  death  of  Christ  is  the  fact 
which  remains  the  most  striking  manifestation  of  the  love  of  God. — • 
His  OTArn  love;  possibly  in  contrast  with  the  love  of  men,  but  cer- 
tainly suggesting  thai  it  was  God's  love  (of  benevolence)  which  led  to  the 
Atonement. — Toward  us.  To  be  joined  with  'love,'  and  referring, 
as  does  the  whole  section,  to  Chinstians. — In  that.  This  may  mean 
'because'  (Weiss),  but  the  common  rendering  is  preferable. — While 
we  were  yet  sinners.  So  in  character,  and  so  before  God,  who 
had  not  yet  justified  us. — Christ  died  for  us.  (Comp.  ver.  6.) 
His  death  was  the  ground  of  our  justification  ;  God's  love  provided 
this  ground,  while  we  were  yet  sinners. 

Ver.  9.  Much  more  therefore.  The  inference  from  God's  love 
as  displayed  in  the  death  of  Christ  (vers.  6-8),  is  the  assurance  of  full 
salvation.  An  argument  from  the  greater  to  the  less.  '  If  Christ  died 
for  His  enemies.  He  will  surely  save  His  friends'  (Hodge). — Being 
now  justified.  A  single  act  is  referred  to,  but  its  result  remains: 
'now,'  in  conti^ast  with  '  while  we  were  yet  sinners  '  (ver.  8). — By  his 
blood,  lit.,  'in.'  A  concrete  expression  for  the  atoning  death  of 
Christ,  which  is  the  meritorious  cause  of  our  justification  (comp. 
chap.  3:  25). — Saved  through  him  from  the  wrath  of  God. 
The  R.  V.  properly  supplies  'of  God'  (in  Italics).  The  full  final 
escape  from  wrath,  at  the  last  judgment,  is  suggested,  but  this  is  only 
a  negative  expi-ession  for  'the  hope  of  the  glory  of  God'  (ver.  2); 
there  being  no  middle  position  between  objects  of  wrath  and  heirs 
of  glory.  The  Apostle  thus  joins  the  certainty  of  salvation  with 
the  fact  of  God's  wrath  against  sin  and  the  certainty  of  its  exe- 
cution upon  unbelieving  sinners.  As  respects  the  word  wrath,  'it  de- 
notes a  personal  emotion,  and  not  merely  an  abstract  attribute.  A 
divine  emotion  is  a  divine  attribute  in  energy.     In  relation  to  it,  the 


5:  10.]  ROMANS  V.  77 

then,  being  now  justified  ^  by  his  blood,  shall  we  be 

10  saved  from  the  wrath  of  God  through  him.     For  if, 

while  we  were  enemies,  we  were  reconciled  to  God 

through  the  death  of  his  Son,  much  more,  being  re- 

1  Gr.  in. 

oblation  of  Christ  is  called  a  "propitiation"  (1  John  2:  2;  4:  10). 
The  feeling  of  anger  towards  sin  is  net  incompatible  with  the  feeling 
of  compassionate  benevolence  (ver.  7)  towards  the  sinner.  The  very 
Being  who  is  displeased,  is  the  very  same  Being  who,  through  a  pla- 
catory atonement  of  His  own  .providing,  saves  from  the  displeasure' 
(Sheddj. 

Ver.  10.  For.  A  further  setting  forth  of  the  thought  of  ver.  9. — 
While  we  were  enemies;  i.  e.,  being,  as  we  were,  the  objects  of 
God's  holy  wrath.  That  this  was  while  we,  on  our  part,  were  opposed 
to  God  is  certainly  true;  but  the  best  commentators  agree  in  declaring 
that  the  other  sense  is  the  logical  one.  The  only  objection  to  it  rests 
on  a  mechanical  and  false  view  of  Scripture  language.  It  is  supposed 
to  imply  a  wrong  state  of  feeling  on  the  part  of  God.  But  this  is  im- 
possible. When  the  Scriptures  say  that  God  has  wrath  agiinst  sin- 
ners (which  really  means  that  they  are  '  enemies '  in  the  sense  we 
advocate),  they  do  not  assert  that  He  has  the  revengeful,  passionate 
feelings  which  naturally  belong  to  human  enmity.  Every  assertion, 
even  in  our  ordinary  use  of  language,  is  modified  by  the  character  of 
the  person  spoken  of;  much  more  in  this  case,  for  God  must  be  right, 
if  there  is  any  distinction  between  right  and  wrong.  Nor  does  this 
view  contradict  the  love  of  God :  His  love  shines  out  conspicuously, 
becomes  effective  by  means  of  the  plan  which  removes  His  enmity 
without  detriment  to  His  holiness.— We  were  reconciled  to  God, 
eto.  In  accordance  with  the  last  remark,  we  refer  this  to  God's  act 
by  means  of  which  we  cease  to  be  the  objects  of  His  holy  wrath. 
(Comp.  ver.  11,  where  'reconciliation'  has  been  substituted  for 
'  atonement,'  and  where  this  '  reconciliation  '  is  said  to  be  '  received  '). 
The  primary  sense,  therefore,  points  to  the  great  change  which  has 
taken  place  in  the  relation  of  God  to  us,  by  means  of  the  voluntary 
atoning  sacrifice  of  Christ  ('through  the  death  of  His  Son').  Thus 
God's  wrath  was  removed.  His  justice  satisfied,  and,  in  consequence, 
men  are  reunited  to  Him  as  a  loving  and  reconciled  Father.  While 
it  is  true  that  man  is  reconciled  to  God  'through  the  death  of  His  Sod,' 
this  is  not  the  thought  from  which  the  Apostle  is  arguing,  nor  is  it 
justified  by  correct  laws  of  interpretation.  'All  attempts  to  make 
this,  the  secondary  meaning  of  the  word,  to  be  the  primary,  rest  not 
on  an  unprejudiced  exegesis,  but  on  a  foregone  determination  to  get 
rid  of  the  reality  of  God's  anger  against  sin'  (Trench).  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  clear  that  the  two  sides  are  practically  inseparable  ;  and 
this  because  our  reconciliation  to  God,  as  a  moral  process  on  our  side  is 
prompted  and  encouraged  by  the  assurance  that  God  has  been  recoa- 


78  ROMANS  V.  [5:  11. 

11  conciled,  shall  Ave  be  saved  ^  by  his  life ;  and  not  only 
so,  ^  but  we  also  rejoice  in  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus 
Cliristj  through  vvhom  we  have  now  received  the  re- 
conciliation. 

1  Gr.  in.  2  Gr.  but  also  glorying. 

ciled  to  us,  resting  on  the  demonstration  of  His  love  to  us  in  the  ato- 
ning death  of  Christ,  which  was  the  meritorious  ground  of  His  recon- 
ciliation to  us.  Our  privilege  will  seem  all  the  greater,  our  duty  the 
more  imperative,  from  holding  fast  to  the  plain  meaning  of  the  pas- 
sage.—Much  more,  being  reconciled,  once  for  all.  The  former 
clause  (•  while  we  were')  pointed  to  a  past  state;  this  indicates  a  past 
act.  Paul  is  speaking  of  Christians,  who  have  been  justified  (ver.  1), 
who  have  embraced  this  plan  of  reconciliation,  to  whom  God  is  ac- 
tually reconciled.  On  this  accomplished  fact  he  bases  his  argument : 
We  shall  be  saved  by  (or,  'in')  his  life.  Fellowship  with  the 
life  of  the  ascended  and  reigning  Lord  is  here  suggested.  '  The  death 
of  Christ  effected  our  reconciliation  ;  all  the  less  can  His  exalted  life 
leave  our  deliverance  unfinished.  The  livhiff  Christ  cannot  leave  with- 
out final  success  what  His  death  effected.  This,  however,  is  accom- 
plish^■d  not  merely  through  His  intercession  (chap.  8:  34).  but  also 
through  His  whole  working  in  His  kingly  office  for  believers  up  to 
the  completion  of  His  work  and  kingdom;  1  Cor.  15:  22'  (Meyer). 
*  This  same  Saviour  that  died  for  them  still  lives,  and  ever  lives,  to 
sanctify,  prc>tect.  and  save  them  '  (Hodge). 

Ver.  11.  A.nd  not  only  so.  Not  only  have  we  been  reconciled. 
Some  explain;  not  only  shall  we  be  saved;  but  this  is  not  so  gram- 
matical, since  the  correct  reading  in  the  next  clause  (' glorying,'  R. 
v.,  marg. )  makes  this  parallel  with  'reconcilt^d.'  This  verse  then 
introduces  the  side  of  human  feeling.  The  reconciliation  is  God's 
act,  it  gives  assurance  of  complete  salvation  in  the  living  Christ ;  but 
this  produces  present  joy,  triumph,  glory  (comp.  vers.  2,  3.) — We 
also  rejoice  in  God.  The  verb  is  the  same  as  in  vers.  2,  3,  ren- 
dered in  three  different  ways  in  the  A.  V.  (The  correct  reading 
requires  us  to  connect  this  verse  more  closely  with  the  preceding.  See 
the  punctuation  of  the  R,  V.)  Our  glory  is  this  :  '  that  God  is  ours, 
and  we  are  His,  and  that  we  have  in  all  confidence  all  blessings  in 
common  from  Him  and  with  Him'  ( Luther).— Through  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  No  glorying  that  we  have  as  Christians  comes  to  us 
other  than  through  Him.  Jle  reconciles  God  to  us,  but  He  also  recon- 
ciles us  to  God  ;  for  it  is  through  Him  we  have  now  received  the 
reconciliation.  In  itself  '  the  reconciliation '  primarily  means  a 
new  relation  of  God  to  us,  not  a  moral  change  in  us.  The  article 
points  to  the  well-known  reconciliation,  spoken  of  in  ver.  10.  But 
here  the  Apostle  directly  refers  to  the  believing  act  of  reception 
and  appropriation.  'Our'  is  open  to  the  objection  that  it  suggests 
loo  exclusively  a  reconciliation  on  our  part,  which  exclusive  reference 


5:  12.]  ROMANS  V.  79 

Chapter  5 :  12-21. 

Parallel  and  Contrast  between  Connection  with  Adam 
and  Union  with  Christ;  Righteousness  and  Life 
over  against  Sin  and  Death, 

12      Therefore,  as  through  one  man  sin  entered  into  the 
Avorld,  and  death   through  sin  ;  and  so  death  passed 

is  forbidden  by  the  word  'received.'  When  we  were  justified  by 
faith,  we  received  this  reconciliation,  it  became  ours,  through  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  who  procured  it  for  us,  and  who  by  being  our  per- 
sonal Saviour  makes  us  glory  in  God.  Thus  is  completed  the  circle  of 
thought  begun  in  vers.  1,  2. — The  word  '  atonement,'  found  here  in 
the  English  version,  has  led  to  much  useless  discussion.  Within  the 
last  half  century  voluminous  controversies  have  been  carried  on,  which 
failed  to  recognize  the  mistranslation,  or,  recognizing,  it  ignored  it  in 
the  interest  of  dogmatic  prejudices.  The  reader  must  bear  in  mind 
the  following  facts:  (1.)  That  the  word  corresponds  with  that  ren- 
dered (twice)  'reconciled'  ia  ver.  10;  hence  'reconciliation'  is  in 
any  case  preferable.  (2.)  'Atonement'  in  its  old  sense  (^  at-one- 
ment)  meant  '  reconciliation,'  but  does  not  now  mean  this.  (3.)  It 
is  now  a  technical  terra  applied  to  the  death  of  Christ,  as  an  expiation, 
propitiation,  satisfaction  (see  chap.  3  :  25).  All  arguments  as  to  the 
nature  of  the  atonement  which  fail  to  recognize  these  linguistic  facts, 
imply  ignorance  or  dishonesty. 

2.  Parallel  and  Controfit  beticeen  the  Remlti^  of  Connection  with  Adam 
and  Union  with  Christ:  Righteousness  and  Life  over  against  Sin  and 
Death,. vers.  12-2 1 . 
This  profound  section  is,  in  its  immediate  connection,  an  illustration  of  what  pre- 
cedes, namely,  the  blessed  condition  of  those  who  receive  reconciliation  'who  are 
justified,  vers.  I,  11)  as  a  free  gift.  As  if  the  Apostle  would  say,  this  gratuitous  justi- 
fication through  Christ  closely  resembles,  though  with  points  of  difference,  our  con- 
nection as  sinners  with  Adam :  especially  in  this,  that  the  one  represents  the  many ; 
sin  and  death  are  bound  together  in  the  one  head,  Adam:  righteou.sness  and  life  in 
the  other  head,  Christ.  Like  a  skilTul  physicinn,  the  Apostle  here  goes  to  the  root  of 
the  matter,  not  only  in  speaking  of  the  disea.«e,  but  also  of  the  cure.  Hence  the  sec- 
tion is  not  an  episode,  although  on  the  other  hand  it  is  not  the  beginning  of  a  new 
division  of  the  Epistle.  It  is  rather  a  forward  step  in  the  course  of  thought,  serving 
as  a  basis  for  an  advance  from  the  doctrine  of  gratuitous  justification  to  that  of  vital 
union  with  Christ,  on  which  rest  our  sanctification  and  glorification.  It  is  a  confirm- 
ation of  this  view  of  the  passage  that  some  able  commentatore  begin  a  new  division 
of  the  Epistle  here,  while  others  take  it  as  the  clo?e  of  that  part  which  treats  of  justi- 
fication; comp.  the  divisions  of  Lange  and  Godet.  The  beginning,  middle,  and  end 
of  history  are  here  brought  together  in  their  representative  moral  powers  and  princi- 
ples. Only  a  mind  ot  the  highest  order — to  say  nothing  of  inspii-ation — could  con- 
ceive such  vast  thoughts,  and  express  them  in  ao  few  words. 


80  ROMANS  V.  [5:  12. 

This  part  of  the  Epistle  has  been  a  battle  ground  for  exegetes  from  the  days  of 
Augustine ;  every  line  bears  the  marks  of  theological  controversy.  Without  antici- 
pating, we  may  remark  that  here  Paul  evidently  views  the  human  race  as  an  organic 
unit.  Adam  and  Christ,  he  conceives,  sustain  to  it  a  central  and  universal  relation. 
The  former  was  not  merely  an  individual,  but  the  head  of  the  race,  and  his  trans- 
gression affected  the  whole  race.  The  latter,  the  second  Adam,  the  Son  of  man,  is 
the  representative  head  of  renewed  humanity,  who  has  gained  for  His  people  more 
than  Adam  lost.  God,  in  infinite  wisdom  and  mercy,  has  overruled  the  wrath  of 
man  for  His  own  glory.  These  are  the  two  leading  thoughts  of  the  section  :  as  re- 
spects sin  and  death,  righteousness  and  life,  the  act  of  the  one  (Adam,  Christ)  affects 
the  position  and  character  of  the  many.  The  main  point  is  not  'imputation,'  which 
is,  however,  as  we  hold,  plainly  suggested ;  but  rather  the  otieness  of  the  person,  lay- 
ing the  meritorious  ground,  respectively,  for  the  states  of  sin  and  death,  and  of  right- 
eousness and  life.  But  the  parallel  is  not  complete :  the  triumph  of  grace  exceeds 
the  ruin  of  sin.  (The  'much  more'  is  not  numerical,  nor  merely  logical,  but  dynamic.) 
We  may  analyze  the  section  thus  :— 

The  connection  of  sin  and  death  asserted  in  the  case  of  Adam,  the  parallel  suggested, 
but  n'-t  expressed;  ver.  12.  Historical  confirmation  of  the  fact  respecting  the  result 
of  Adam's  transgression),  closing  with  a  reference  to  '  the  coming  One,'  which  supplies 
thft  omitted  parallel ;  vers.  13,  14.  Three  points  of  difference  stated,  before  the  paral- 
lel is  resumed;  vers.  15-17.  (The  punctuation  of  the  A.  V.  making  a  parenthesis 
from  vers.  13-17,  joins  vers.  12  and  18  too  closely,  and  detracts  from  the  force  of  the 
intervening  verses.)  Resumption  and  restatement  of  parallel;  vers.  18, 19.  Purpose 
of  the  law  to  show  the  abounding  of  grace  (indicated  in  vers.  15-17);  vers.  20,  21. 

As  regards  the  translation  of  the  section,  there  is  unusual  agreement  among  scho- 
lars, but  no  part  of  the  A.  Y.  calls  tor  more  frequent  minor  emendations  to  present 
the  exact  sense  of  the  original.  The  inaccuracies  in  rendering  the  Greek  preposi- 
tions and  the  article  are  especially  numerous. 

Ver.  12.  Therefore.  First  of  all  on  account  of  the  statement  of 
ver.  11,  but  yivtually  on  account  of  all  that  precedes,  since  ver.  11 
sums  up  the  whole  doctrine  of  righteousness  and  salvation.  Since 
'  reconciliation '  is  received  through  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  the 
manner  already  set  forth,  'therefore'  the  following  parallel  between 
Adam  and  Christ  holds  good. — As,  etc.  The  main  difficulty  is  in  re- 
gard to  what  should  correspond  with  'as,'  the  construction  not  being 
regular.  The  view  of  Meyer,  which  is  grammatically  most  defensible, 
is  that  indicated  in  the  analysis  at  the  beginning  of  the  section.  The 
correspondence  is  suggested  in  ver.  12,  the  second  member  ('the  com- 
ing One')  indicated  in  ver.  14;  expressed,  after  some  points  of  differ- 
ence, in  vers.  18,  19.  In  the  rush  of  ideas  suggested  by  the  parallel, 
Paul  intentionally  suspends  the  mention  of  the  second  half,  until  he 
has  proven  one  point  in  regard  to  the  first  half  (vers.  13,  14),  and 
stated  three  important  contrasts.  In  full  form  the  parallel  would  be: 
'so  also  by  one  man,  Jesus  Christ,  righteousness  entered  into  the 
world,  and  life  throno-h  righteousness,  and  thus  life  shall  extend  to  all 
men,  on  condition  that  all  believe,  or  are  justified.'  But  the  parallel 
cannot  hold  in  the  last  clause ;  for  all  men  are  sinners,  but  not  all  are 


6:  12.]  ROMANS  V.  81 

believers ;  all  are  one  -vrith  Adam,  but  not  all  are  one  with  Christ. 
Other  unsatisfactory  explanations :  that  there  is  a  designed  suppression, 
because  the  parallel  would  not  hold;  that  vers.  13-17  are  parenthetical 
(so  A.  v.);  that  we  should  supply:  'It  was/  or,  'Christ  wrought,' 
before  *as.' — Through  one  man,  i.  e.  Adam  (ver.  14).  Eve  is  not 
mentioned,  for  Adam  had  received  the  commandment,  was  the  bead  of 
the  woman,  and  had  he  not  trangressed,  his  posterity  would  not  have 
sinned  (Bengel).  The  comparison  between  Adam  and  Christ  is  the 
only  apt  one,  and  there  is  no  reference  to  Satan,  because  the  Apostle 
is  concerned  with  the  effect,  not  the  mode,  of  the  fall  (Meyer). — Sin. 
The  presence  of  the  definite  article  in  the  Greek,  and  the  course  of 
thought  sustain  the  view  that  '  sin '  is  here  regarded  as  a  power  or 
principle,  personified  as  a  fearful  tyrant,  who  has  acquired  universal 
dominion  over  the  human  race.  Compare  the  characteristics  of 
'sin,'  as  given  in  this  Epistle:  it  'reigns  in  death'  (ver.  21); 
'lords  it  over  us'  (chap.  6:  14);  'deceives  and  slays'  the  sinner 
(chap.  7:  11);  'works  death'  in  us  (chap.  7:  13).  This  view  is 
further  sustained  by  the  distinction  made,  throughout  this  section, 
between  'sin,'  '  transgression,'  and  'ofi'ence.'  The  term  is  therefore, 
not  to  be  limited,  either  to  original  sin  on  the  one  hand,  or  to  actual 
sin  on  the  other.— Entered  into  the  world  ;  the  world  of  man. 
'  According  to  the  Apostle's  conviction,  evil  was  already  in  existence 
in  another  world'  (Tholuck),  that  of  the  angels.  Hence  our  passage 
sheds  no  light  on  the  origin  of  evil,  except  in  the  human  race. — 
Death.  The  entrance  of  death  into  the  world  of  humanity  was 
through  sin,  death  as  a  power  in  the  world  resulted  from  the  en- 
trance of  sin  as  a  power  ;  the  two  are  uniformly  connected  in  the 
Bible,  beginning  with  Gen.  2  :  17.  Some  limit  the  reference  here 
to  physical  death,  which  undoubtedly  was  the  first  result'.  But 
the  results  of  '  sin '  are  more  extensive,  and  the  contrast  with  '  life ' 
in  vers.  17,  18,  21,  points  to  the  widest  sense  of  'death'  through- 
out the  entire  passage.  This  includes  all  physical  and  moral  evil, 
the  entire  penal  consequences  of  sin,  death  of  the  body,  spiritual 
death,  and  eternal  death  of  both  soul  and  body  ('  the  second  death,' 
Kev.  2:11;  20  :  6,  14 ;  21  :  8).  The  fact  that  physical  death  did  not 
immediately  follow  the  first  transgression,  shows  that  Gen.  2:  17  in- 
cluded a  more  extensive  penalty. — Passed,  lit.,'  came  through,'  unto 
all  men.  The  universal  reign  of  death  is  thus  connected,  chrono- 
logically and  logically,  with  its  cause,  the  universal  reign  of  sin.  '  All 
men  '  represents  the  several  individuals  making  up  '  the  world,  — For 
that,  or,  '  because,'  '  on  the  ground  that.'  This  is  the  view  now  gen- 
erally accepted.  Other  views :  '  In  whom,  i.  e.,  Adam  ;  an  ancient 
view  (so  Augustine),  now  generally  rejected  as  ungrammatical.  '  On 
the  condition  that  ; '  but  thi'*  is  unusual,  and  designed  to  meet  a  doc- 
trinal difficulty.— All  sinned,  not,  'have  sinned.'  A  single  historical 
act  is  meant,  namely,  the  past  event  of  Adam's  fall,  which  was  at  the 
same  time  virtually  the  fall  of  the  human  race  as  represented  by  him 
and  germinally  contained  in  him.  (For  the  views  of  this  connection 
6 


82  ROMANS  V.  [5  s  13,  14. 


13  unto  all  men,  for  that  all  sinned  : — for  until  the  law 
sin  was  in  the  world :  but  sin  is  not  imputed   whan 

14  there  is  no  law.  Nevertheless  death  reigned  from 
Adam  until  Moses,  even  over  them  that  had  not 
sinned  after  the  likeness  of  Adam's  transgression,  who 

between  Adam  and  his  posterity,  see  Excursus  at  the  close  of  the  sec- 
tion.) As  regards  the  interpretation  of  the  words,  it  may  be  insisted 
that  '  sinned '  is  not  equivalent  to  'became  sinful.'  There  remain  two 
views  :  (1.)  As  a  historical  fact,  when  Adam  sinned  all  sinned,  be- 
cause of  the  vital  connection  between  him  and  his  posterity.  (2.)  When 
Adam  sinned,  all  were  declared  sinners,  he  being  the  representative 
of  the  race.  The  objection  to  this  is,  that  '  sinned  '  is  not  equivalent 
to  '  were  regarded  as  sinners.'  It  makes  the  parallel  between  Adam 
and  Christ  more  close  than  the  passage  thus  far  appears  to  warrant. 

Ver.  13.  For  until  the  la-w.  Vers.  13,  14,  present  a  historical 
confirmation  of  the  statement  that  '  all  sinned.'  All  sinned  when 
Adam  sinned,  for  the  penalty  of  sin  came  from  the  very  first,  and 
that,  too,  when  there  was  no  such  transgression  of  positive  precept  as 
in  the  case  of  Adam.  Hence  the  penalty  was  the  result  of  Adam's 
sin,  an  idea  familiar  to  all  who  believed  the  Old  Testament. — Sin 
■was  in  the  "world.  Sin  as  a  tyrant,  with  its  penal  consequences. 
This  thought  is  resumed  and  expounded  in  ver.  14. — But  sin  is  not 
imputed  ;  '  fully  reckoned  '  is  perhaps  the  best  reading  of  the  com- 
pound verb  in  the  original.  In  a  certain  sense  it  is  reckoned  (comp. 
chap.  2:  9-16),  but  it  cannot  be  fully  reckoned  as  'transgression,' 
■when  there  is  no  lavy,  or,  in  the  absence  of  law.  This  proposi- 
tion would  be  self-evident  to  the  readers,  and  it  was  emphatically  true 
of  the  Mosaic  law,  which,  as  ver.  14  shows,  was  in  the  Apostle's  mind. 

Ver,  14.  Nevertheless.  Although  sin  is  not  fully  reckoned 
where  the  law  is  absent.  — Death  reigned.  '  Lorded  ir.'  The  con- 
sequence of  sin  ('  death  through  sin,'  ver.  12)  was  universal,  even 
before  the  law  :  from  Adam  until  Moses.  The  word  '  until '  re- 
presents here  a  different  word  from  that  used  in  ver.  13,  but  there  is 
no  appreciable  difference  in  sense. — Even  over  them  that,  etc. 
Death,  which  here  includes  more  than  physical  death,  as  the  penalty 
of  sin,  lorded  it  over  even  such  as  had  not  sinned,  etc.,  i.  e.,  were 
not  guilty  of  a  definite  transgreission,  the  transgression  of  a  definite 
command  of  God.  The  Apostle's  argument  is  that  death  came  upon 
these  as  a  consequence  of  the  sin  of  Adam,  and  thus  he  proved  that 
'  death  passed  unto  all  men,  because  all  sinned '  in  that  transgression. 
The  class  'that  did  not  sin,'  etc.,  is  not  further  described.  Infants 
are  doubtless  included,  though  not  specially  referred  to.  In  the 
period  between  Adam  and  Moses  divine  commands  were  given  ;  those 
who  transgressed  them  were  punished  accordingly,  but  even  those, 
whoever  they  were,  who  had  not  received  positive  command  came 
under  the  consequence  of  this  sin,  thus  proving  that  Adam's  sin  was 


5:  15]. 


ROMANS  V. 


83 


15  is  a  figure  of  him  that  was  to  come.     But  not  as  the 
trespass,  so  also  is  the  free  gift.     For  if  by  the  tres- 

the  cause.  —Who  is  a  figure  of  him  that  -was  to  come,  *  the  com- 
ing One,'  I.  e.,  the  second  Adam,  'Jesus  Christ'  (ver.  15).  Here  we 
have  suggested  the  second  member  of  the  parallel  begun  in  ver.  12. 
The  first  Adam,  the  one  man  through  whom  sin  and  death  entered  into 
the  world,  is  the  'figure,'  lit.,  'type,'  of  the  one  man  Jesus  Christ.  The 
word  '  type '  is  derived  from  the  verb  meaning  to  strike,  and  hence  sig- 
nifies first,  a  blow,  an  impression,  then  form,  figure,  pattern,  model ;  at 
length  we  find  the  technical  sense,  a  person  or  thing  bearing  a  de- 
signed resemblance  to  some  higher  person  or  thing,  foreshadowing 
or  symbolizing  an  '  antitype.'  Christ  is  here  spoken  of  as  '  the  com- 
ing One,'  as  historically  related  to  the  first  Adam.  Comp.  1  Cor.  15  : 
45,  where  Paul  directly  contrasts  the  first  and  second  Adam. 

Vers.  15-17.  The  parallel  has  been  suggested,  but  the  points  of 
difference  are  brought  out  before  the  correspondence  is  fully  stated 
(vers.  18,  19).  The  symmetry  of  the  clause  will  appear  from  the  fol- 
lowing arrangement  of  the  passage  :  — 

f  But  not  as  the  trespass, 

15  1      so  also  is  the  free  gift. 
For  if  by  the  trespass 

of  the  one 

the  many  died; 
much  more 
did  the  grace  of  God,  and  the  gift  by  the  grace 
of  the  one  man,  .Jesus  Christ, 
abound  unto  the  many. 
And  not  as  through  one  that  sinned 

16  \     so  is  the  gift : 
for  the  judgmput  came 

of  one  (man  or  trespass) 
unto  condemnation, 
but  the  free  gift  came 
of  many  trespasses 
unto  justification  (an  act  of  righteousness). 
I  For  if,  by  the  trespass  of  the  one, 

17  death  reigned 
through  the  one ; 

,  much  more 

shall  they  that  receive  the  abundance 

of  grace  and  of  the  gift  of  righteousness 
reign  in  life 

through  the  one,  even  Jesus  Christ. 

The  question  arises  whether  '  much  more '  expresses  a  stronger  de- 
gree of  evidence  or  a  higher  degree  of  efiBcacy.  In  vers.  16  and  17  the 
former  is  certainly  preferable,  and  probably  in  ver.  15  also.  It  is  not 
that  more  are  saved  than  are  lost,  this  cannot  be  ;  nor  yet  that  what 
is  gained  is  more  than  what  is  lost,  though  this  is  true  enough  ;  but 
the  character  of  God,  from  a  Christian  point  of  view,  is  such  thai  the 
comparison  gives  a  'much  more'  certain  basis  for  belief  in  what  is 
gained  through  the  second  Adam  than  in  the  certainties  of  sin  and 
death  through  the  first  Adam. 


84  ROMANS  V.  [5:  r6. 

pass  of  the  one  the  many  died,  much  more  did  the 
grace  of  God,  and  the  gift  by  the  grace  of  the  one 
16  man,  Jesus  Christ,  abound  unto  the  many.  And  not 
as  through  one  that  sinned,  so  is  the  gift :  for  the 
judgement  came  of  one  unto  condemnation,  but  the 

Ver.  15.     But  not  as  the  trespass.     The  word  here  used  refers 

to  an  act  of  sin,  and  is  almost  the  same  as  '  transgression'  (ver.  14), 
and  'disobedience'  (ver.  19).  Perhaps  this  suggests,  more  than  the 
other  terms,  the  idea  of  weakness,  hence  '  fall '  expresses  one  phase 
of  the  meaning.  But  it  is  usually  rendered  *  trespass.'  All  these 
words  are  less  inclusive  than  'sin'  (vers.  12,  13).  'But'  marks  a 
strong  contrast. — So  also  is  the  free  gift,  or,  '  gift  of  grace,'  '  the 
atoning  and  justifying  act  of  divine  grace  in  Jesus  Christ'  (Mej^er). 
Four  different  words  are  used  in  this  passage  to  express  the  same 
thought  of  free  grace,  and  it  is  difficult  to  distinguish  them  in  English. 
— For  introduces  the  proof  of  the  difference  just  stated. — If,  as  is 
certainly  the  case,  by  (not,'  through,'  as  the  A.  V.  incorrectly  renders) 
the  trespass  of  the  one.  The  article  must,  of  course,  be  restored  in 
English,  to  bring  out  the  sense:  '  the  one,'  'the  many.'  In  this  case 
Adam  is  '  the  one,'  and  the  consequence  to  all  of  the  immense  multi- 
tude of  his  posterity  is  tersely  expressed  :  the  many  died.  '  The 
many,'  over  against  'the  one'  ;  not  'many'  (as  in  the  A.  V.),  imply- 
ing a  contrast  with  *  few'  ;  here  it  is  equivalent  to  'all ';  comp.  vers. 
12,  18. — Much  more.  Not  simply  that  the  gift  was  more  abundant, 
but  with  much  more  certainty  it  is  to  be  expected  from  God,  or  has 
God  proved,  that  grace  abounds. — The  grace  of  God.  This  is  the 
source  of  the  gift,  namely,  the  gift  of  justification. — By  (lit.,  'in')  the 
grace  of  the  one  man,  Jesus  Christ.  This  may  be  joined  either 
with  '  gift,'  or  with  the  verb  ;  the  latter  is  preferable. — Abound 
unto  the  many.  'The  many'  in  Christ.  Meyer,  who  refers  it  to 
all  mankind,  as  in  the  previous  clause,  says:  'To  this  multitude  has 
the  grace  of  God  been  plentifully  imparted,  namely  ;  from  the  objec- 
tive point  of  view,  in  so  far  as  Christ's  act  of  redemption  has  acquired 
for  all  the  divine  grace  and  gift,  although  the  subjective  reception  of  it 
is  conditioned  by  faith.' 

Ver.  16.  And  not  as  through  one  that  sinned.  There  is 
some  (but  insufficient)  authority  for  another  reading  :  '  through  one 
sin.'  A  single  act  of  sin  is  referred  to  in  either  case. — So  is  the 
gift.  It  is  only  necessary  to  supply  '  is  ; '  though  some  suggest  fuller 
explanations.  '  Gift'  is  a  different  word  from  that  in  ver.  15,  but  refers 
to  the  same  thing. — For  the  judgement.  The  judicial  sentence  of  God. 
The  word  itself  may  refer  to  a  favorable  or  unfavorable  sentence. — 
Came.  This,  or  some  verb  of  motion,  is  to  be  supplied ;  the  preposi- 
tions involving  the  idea  of  motion,  or  result. — Of,  or,  '  from.'  one. 
(Not,  '  by.' )  This  may  refer  to  one  trespass,  in  accordance  with  the  next 
clause,  or  to  one  man,  namely,  '  one  that  sinned,'  in  the  previous  clause. 


5:  17,  18.]  ROMANS  V.  85 

free  gift  came  of  many  trespasses  unto  ^justification. 

17  For  if,  by  the  trespass  of  the  one,  death  reigned 
through  the  one;  much  more  shall  they  that  receive 
the  abundance  of  grace  and  ^of  the  gift  of  righteous- 
ness reign  in  life  through  the  one,  even  Jesus  Christ. 

18  So  then  as  through  one  trespass  the  judgeraent  came 

1  Gr.  an  act  of  righteousness.  ^  Some  ancient  authorities  omit  of  the  gift. 

The  latter  is  preferable  ;  what  precedes  usually  determines  the  sense  of 
an  elliptical  phrase. — Unto  condemnation.  The  judicial  sentence 
('judgement'),  in  consequence  of  the  act  of  one  man,  resulted  in  '  con- 
demnation ;' as  set  forth  inver.  12. — But  the  free  gift,  or,  'gift  of 
grace'  (as  in  ver.  15). — Of,  or,  'from,'  many  trespasses.  The  many 
sins  of  men  could  be  pardoned  only  by  a  '  free  gift.'  In  this  sense  they 
were  the  origin  or  occasion  of  the  free  gift.  As  a  result  this  free  gift 
came  unto  justification.  This  is  not  the  word  usually  rendered 
'justification.'  But  the  meaning  is  substantially  the  same.  The  word, 
derived  from  the  verb  meaning  '  to  account  righteous,'  here  denotes 
either,  in  opposition  to  '  condemnation,'  the  righteous  decree  or  verdict 
which  God  pronounces  on  account  of  the  perfect  obedience  of  Christ, 
or,  in  opposition  to  'trespass'  (as  in  ver.  18),  the  rigliteous  act  of 
Christ  on  which  that  verdict  is  based.  It  seems  improper  to  refer  it 
to  the  subjective  state  of  justification.     See  further  on  ver.  18. 

Ver.  17.  For  if.  A  confirmation  of  ver.  16,  yet  an  advance  of 
thought. — By  the  trespass  of  the  one.  A  briefer  reading :  '  in 
one  trespass,'  is  found  in  good  authorities,  but  the  longer  reading  is 
now  clearly  established— Death  reigned  through  the  one,  ?.  e., 
Adam.  The  repetition  is  probably  to  prepare  for  the  triumphant  close 
of  the  verse,  contrasting  the  two  persons.  The  correspondence  be- 
tween the  clauses  is  in  other  respects  not  exact. — Much  more.  Here 
certainly  not  numerical:  if  this  was  God's  way  of  justice,  with  much 
more  certainty  will  His  way  of  grace  be,  as  is  now  described. — They 
that  receive  the  abundance  of  the  grace.  The  change  of  form 
brings  into  the  foreground  the  persons  who  are  the  subjects  of  grace. 
With  '  the  trespass  of  the  one '  is  contrasted  the  abundance  of  the  gi  ace 
as  bestowed  on,  and  accepted,  by  living  persons. — The  gift  of  right- 
eousness. 'Righteousness'  is  'the  gift,' righteousness  imputed. — 
Reign  in  life  through  the  one.  even  Jesus  Christ.  'In  life' 
is  to  be  taken  in  its  fullest  sense ;  this  is  the  sphere  in  which  those 
who  receive  the  abundance  of  the  grace  shall  reign.  The  whole  clause 
has  a  triumphant  tone,  pointing  from  present  grace  to  future  glory,  all 
mediaied  '  through  the  one,  .Jesus  Christ.'  This  is  the  emphatic  side 
ol  the  contrast.  If,  as  a  fact,  sin  and  death  were  through  Adam,  then 
much  more  certain  is  it  that  abundant  present  grace  and  triumphant 
future  glory  shall  be  through  our  one  head,  Jesus  Christ. 

Ver.  18.     So  then  (not,  'therefore').     With  this  phrase,  which 


86  ROMANS  V.  [5 !  19. 

unto  all  men  to  condemnation ;  even  so  through  one 

act  of  righteousness  the  free  gift  came  unto  all  men  to 

19  justification  of  life.     For  as  through  the  one  man^s 

means  '  in  consequence  of  all  this,  it  follows  that,'  Paul  resumes  the 
parallel,  summing  up  all  the  previously  stated  points  of  resemblance 
and  difference  ;  the  design  being  to  show  how  the  inheritance  and 
imputation  of  sin  confirms,  rendei's  more  certain,  the  imputation  of 
righteousness  and  the  abounding  reign  of  grace. — Through  one 
trespass.  The  A.  V,  is  incorrect,  since  the  acts,  not  tbe  persons,  are 
here  contrasted. — The  judgement  came.  The  R.  V.  supplies  the 
article  here,  leaving  the  correct  paraphrase  of  the  A.  V.  otherwise 
unaltered. — Unto  all  men  to  condemnation.  Here 'all  men' 
without  exception. — Even  so,  or,  so  also;  the  latter  is  slightly  pre- 
ferable.— Through  one  act  of  righteousness ;  the  same  word 
rendered  'justification'  in  ver.  16.  Here  Christ's  obedience,  viewed 
as  one  act,  as  ihe  ground  of  justification,  seems  to  be  meant,  yet  a 
reference  to  the  justifying  verdict  gives  a  good  sense. — Came,  not, 
'  shall  come,'  since  the  Apostle  is  speaking  of  the  objective  side. — All 
men  to  justification  of  life.  'All  men'  may  be  taken  in  a  uni- 
versal, but  not  in  a  UniversaUst,  sense.  The  '  righteous  act '  which 
forms  the  meritorious  ground  of  God's  justifying  act  is  sufficient  for 
all  men  without  exception  ;  and  the  Apostle  speaks  of  it  in  this  light. 
But  the  subjective  application  of  it  implies  the  receiving  of  it  (ver.  17) 
by  faith.  See  further  on  ver.  19,  which  contrasts  the  actual  results  as 
respects  'the  many'  on  the  one  side,  and  'the  many'  on  the  other. 
'Justification'  is  here  the  proper  rendering.  'Of  life,'  i.  e.,  leading 
to  life,  in  the  fullest  sense;  the  interpretation  'justification  which  is 
life'  confuses  the  Apostle's  thought. 

Ver.  19.  For.  This  word  shows  that  we  have  here  the  explana- 
tion of  ver.  18,  and  thus  of  the  whole  passage.  The  sense  is:  As  in 
consequence  of  the  disobedience  of  the  one  man  (Adam)  the  many  (in- 
cluding all  his  posterity)  were  constituted  sinners  (put  in  the  category 
of  sinners,  subject  to  condemnation),  so  also  in  consequence  of  the 
obedience  of  the  one  (Christ)  shall  the  many  (as  many  as  believe  in 
Him,  ver.  17)  be  constituted  righteous  (be  placed  in  that  category). 
The  contrasts  are  exact,  except  that  '  the  many,'  comes  in  as  a  middle 
term  of  quantity,  that  '  man '  is  omitted  in  the  second  clause,  where 
moreover  the  future  is  substituted  for  the  past,  showing  that  the  actual 
efficacy  cf  the  gospel  is  here  spoken  of,  and  not  the  objective  suffi- 
ciency, as  in  ver.  18. — Were  made  sinners— -were  made  right- 
eous. The  main  point  open  to  discussion,  is  respecting  the  exact 
sense  of  the  word  rendered  'were  made.'  Three  views:  (1)  set 
down,  placed  as  such,  in  a  declarative  sense  ;  (2)  placed  in  the  cate- 
gory, because  of  a  vital  connection  ;  (3)  becoming  so  ethically,  not  de- 
claratively.  The  last  seems  contrary  to  the  whole  course  of  thought. 
The  first  gives  a  grammatical  sense,  but  is  often  held  in  a  way  that 


5:  20.]  ROMANS  V.  87 

disobedience  the  many  were  made  sinners,   even   so 

through  the  obedience  of  the  one  shall  the  many  be 

20  made  righteons.     And  ^  the  law  came  in  beside,  that 

the  trespass  might  abound  ;   but  where  sin  abounded, 

1  Or,  law. 

carries  the  parallel  beyond  Paul's  statements.  The  second  is  sustained 
by  the  best  of  modern  commentators,  though  with  consiiHerable  differ- 
ence in  regard  to  the  mode,  and  the  extent  of  the  parallel.  Meyer's 
position  is:  Through  the  disobedience  of  the  one  man,  because  all  had 
a  part  in  it,  has  the  position  of  all  become  that  of  sinners,  conse- 
quently they  were  subjected  to  punishment ;  on  the  other  hand,  God 
has  forgiven  believers  on  account  of  the  death  of  Christ,  and 
counted  their  faith  as  righteousness  ;  thus  the  obedience  of  the  one  has 
caused  that  at  the  judgment  the  many  shall  by  God's  sentence  enter 
into  the  category  of  the  righteous.  Actual  sin  and  inwrought  right- 
eousness are  results,  on  either  side,  but  these  results  are  not  here 
under  discussion.  'Obedience'  is  chosen,  in  contrast  with  'disobe- 
dience,' with  a  reference,  either  to  Christ's  death  as  the  culminating 
act  of  His  obedience,  or  to  His  whole  life  of  obedience  culminating 
in  that  act.  It  must  be  noticed,  that  the  emphasis  in  this  verse  and 
throughout  is  placed  by  Paul  upon  the  positive  and  gracious  side  of 
the  parallel :  righteousness  and  life  to  the  many  through  the  One 
Jesus  Christ,  while  interpreters  too  often  dwell  well-nigh  exclusively 
upon  the  other  side.  The  inference  of  a  universal  salvation  cannot 
properly  be  drawn  from  vers.  15,  18.  Paul  teaches  the  universal 
sufficiency  of  the  gospel' salvation,  but  we  must,  in  view  of  the  language 
elsewhere  and  of  the  facts  which  meet  us  everywhere,  make  the  im- 
portant distinction  between  this  and  the  subjective  efficacy  of  Christ's 
atonement.  All  men  may  be  saved,  hence  we  invite  all  ;  how  many 
and  which  individuals  will  be  saved,  is  known  only  to  God.  Dr. 
Hodge  says:  'We  have  reason  to  believe  that  the  lost  shall  bear  to  the 
saved  no  greater  proportion  than  the  inmates  of  a  prison  do  to  the 
mass  of  a  community.'  Yet  many  adults  die  in  Christian  lands  and 
surrounded  by  gospel  privileges,  without  giving  any  evidence  of  their 
faith  in  Christ,  and  of  a  second  state  of  probation  we  have  no  proof 
whatever. 

Ver.  20.  And  the  law.  The  Mosaic  law  is  meant,  although  the 
article  is  wanting  in  the  original.  'What  of  the  law  then?'  was  the 
question  the  Jew,  and,  indeed,  any  early  Christian  would  ask. 
'But'  is  therefore  preferable  to  'and.' — Came  in  beside.  The 
same  phrase  is  used  in  a  bad  sense.  Gal.  2 :  4,  but  here  it  indi- 
cates coming  in  addition  to,  not  coming  in  between,  though  the  latter 
is  true.— That  the  trespass  might  abound.  This  was  the  imme- 
diate, but  not  the  final  purpose  (see  ver.  21).  The  Apostle  says  '  tres- 
pass,' not,  '  sin,'  because  the  design  of  the  law  was  not  to  multiply  sin 
as  such,  but  to  make  it  appear,  to  reveal  it  to  the  conscience,  as  a 


88  ROMANS  V.  [5:  21. 

21  grace  did  abound  more  exceedingly  :  that  as  sin  reigned 
in  death,  even  so  might  grace  reign  through  righteous- 
ness unto  eternal  life  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord. 

transgression  of  the  law  of  God.  Yet  the  presence  of  the  law  does 
provoke  to  sin,  and  this  thought  is  not  to  be  ruled  out  in  this  passage. 
— But  ■where  sin  abounded.  In  the  very  sphere,  in  the  Avorld  of 
men  where  '  sia '  existed  as  a  tyrant. — Grace  did  abound  more 
exceedingly  ;  '  over-abounded.'  The  verb  is  a  compound  one,  dif- 
fering in  form  entirely  from  that  previously  used  ;  the  force  of  '  over  ' 
is  superlative,  not  comparative.  This  clause  is  explained  in  ver.  21. 
Ver.  21.  That  as  sin  reigned  in  death.  The  ultimate  purpose 
of  the  exceeding  abounding  of  grace  is  set  forth  in  this  verse,  espe- 
cially in  the  last  clause.  The  first  clause  simply  takes  up  the  other 
side  of  the  parallel.  In  ver.  14  death  is  represented  as  the  tyrant; 
here  'siu'  is  presented  under  the  same  figure,  'death'  being  the 
sphere  of  its  dominion  or  tyranny,  and  referring  to  all  the  penal  con- 
sequences of  sin.  Some  would  render  'by  death,'  but  this  is  objec- 
tionable.— Even  so  (comp.  ver.  18)  might  grace  reign.  This  is 
the  purpose.  'The  design  of  God  in  peraiitting  sin,  and  allowing  it 
to  abound,  was  to  bring  good  out  of  evil ;  to  make  it  the  occasion  of 
the  most  wonderful  display  of  his  giory  and  grace,  so  that  the  benefits 
of  redemption  should  infinitely  transcend  tlie  evil  of  the  apostacy' 
(Hodge). — Through  righteousness.  This  refers  to  imputed  right- 
eousness, in  conformity  with  the  entire  course  of  thought.  Righteous- 
ness of  life  might  be  included,  but  cannot  be  the  main  idea. — Unto 
eternal  life.  'Life'  in  contrast  with  'death,'  and  'eternal'  in  con- 
trast with  temporal.  Physical  death  is  not  abolished,  but  grnce  reigns 
through  righteousness  with  eternal  life  as  the  result. — Through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  This  full  form  is  solemnly  triumphant. 
Adam  is  lost  sight  of;  the  personal  redeemer,  the  king,  is  the  One 
through  whom  Grace  reigns  through  righteousness  unto  eternal  life. — 
^ Sin,  death,  grace,  righteousness,  life.  These  five  stand  thus:  Grace 
rises  highest  in  the  middle;  the  two  conquering  giants,  sin  and  death, 
at  the  left ;  the  double  prize  of  victory,  righteousness  and  life,  at  the 
right ;  and  over  the  buried  name  of  Adam  the  glory  of  the  name  of 
Jesus  blooms'  (Besser). 

Different  Theories  of  Original  Sin  and  Imputation. 
Excursus  on  Rom.  5:  12-21. 

(Comp.  Lange,  Romans,  pp  191-5 ;  where  will  be  found  the  fuller  statements  of  Dr. 
Schaff,  here  presented  in  an  abridged  form.) 

The  universal  dominion  of  sin  and  death  over  the  human  race  is  a  fact,  clearly 
taught  by  the  Apostle  here,  and  daily  confirmed  by  our  religious  experience.  This 
dominion  extends  in  an  unbroken  line  to  our  first  parents,  as  the  transgression  of 
Adam  stands  in  a  causal  relation  to  the  guilt  and  sin  of  his  po.sterity.  The  Apostle 
assumes  this  connection,  in  order  to  illustrate  the  blessed  truth,  that  the  power  and 


5 :  21.]  ROMANS  V.  89 

principle  of  righteousness  and  life  go  back  to  Jesus  Christ,  the  second  Adam.  How- 
ever explained,  the  existence  of  sin  remains  a  stubborn,  terrible  reality.  Least  of  all 
can  it  be  explained  by  the  denial  of  the  parallel,  yet  contrasted,  saving  facts  which 
are  prominent  in  the  Apostle's  mind  ihroughuut  this  section.  The  leading  points 
which  he  asserts,  and  which  therefore  must  enter  into  any  consistent  theory  respect- 
ing his  view  of  origintil  sin,  are :  (1.)  That  the  sin  of  Ad.im  was  the  sin  of  all  his 
posterity  see  ver.  12j ;  in  what  sense  this  is  true,  must  be  determined  by  the  passage 
as  a  whole.  (2.)  That  there  is  parallel  and  contrast  between  the  connection  of  Adam 
and  his  posterity,  and  Christ  and  His  people  ;see  vers.  14-19).  (3.)  That  this  parallel 
applies  to  the  point  which  has  been  so  fully  discussed  in  the  previous  part  of  the 
Epistle,  namely,  that  believers  are  reckoned  righteous  (see  vera.  12-18).  (4.)  That 
the  connection  with  the  two  representative  heads  of  the  race  has  moral  results;  that 
guilt  and  sin,  righteousness  and  life,  are  insejjarably  connected  see  vers.  17-19). 
The  various  theori'  s  may  be  reviewed  in  the  light  of  these  jiositions  : — 
I.  The  PANTHE'STic  and  necessharian  theory,  which  regards  sin  as  an  essential 
attribute  (a  limitation)  of  the  finite,  destroys  the  i-adical  antagonism  between  good 
and  evil,  and  has  nothing  in  common  with  Pauls  views  of  sin  or  grace. 

n.  The  Pelagian  heresy  resolves  the  fall  of  Adam  into  a  comparatively  trivial, 
childish  act  of  disobedience,  which  sets  a  bad  example.  It  holds  that  every  child  is 
born  as  innocent  and  perfect,  though  as  fallible,  as  Adam  when  created.  This  view 
explains  nothing,  and  virtually  denies  all  the  assertions  made  in  this  section.  Its 
affinities,  logically  and  historically,  are  with  Sociniamism  and  the  multifarious  forms 
of  Kationa  ism.  It,  and  every  other  theory  which  denies  the  connection  with 
Adam,  fails  to  meet  the  great  question  re>pecting  the  salvation  of  those  dying  in  in- 
fancy. Such  theories  logically  exclude  them  from  the  heaven  of  the  redeemed, 
either  bj-  denying  their  need  of  salvation,  or  by  rejecting  the  only  principle  in  ac- 
cordance with  which  such  salvation,  if  they  need  it,  is  possible,  namely,  that  of  im- 
putation. 

III.  The  theory  of  a  Pre-Ad.^mic  fall  of  all  men,  which  implies  the  pre-existence 
of  souls,  as  held  by  Plato  and  t»rigen,  is  a  pure  speculation,  and  inconsistent  with  ver. 
12  as  well  as  with  Gen.  3.     It  is  incidenfcilly  oppos'^d  in  chap.  9  :  12. 

IV.  The  Augustinian  or  realistic  theory  holds  that  the  connection  between 
Adam  and  his  posterity  was  such,  that  by  his  individual  transgression  he  vitiated 
human  nature,  and  transmitted  it  in  this  corrupt  and  guilty  state  to  his  descendants 
by  physical  generation,  so  that  there  was  an  impersonal  and  unconscious  participation 
of  the  whole  human  race  in  the  fall  of  Adam.  There  is  this  difference,  however  : 
Adam's  individual  transgression  resulted  in  a  sinful  nature ;  while,  in  the  case  of  his 
descendants,  the  sinful  nature  or  depraved  will  results  in  individual  transgression. 
This  view  accords  in  the  main  with  the  grammatical  exegesis  of  ver.  11,  but  Augus- 
tine himself  incorrectly  exfilained  '  for  that,'  as  '  in  whom'  t.  e.,  Adam.  It  accepts, 
but  does  not  explain,  the  relation  between  genus  and  species.  Like  all  other  matters 
pertaining  to  life,  it  confrpnts  us  with  a  mystery. 

In  the  application  of  this  theory  to  the  positions  (3)  and  (4)  named  above,  different 
views  have  arisen,  mainly  in  regard  to  imputation,  whether  it  is  imimedinte  (or  antece- 
dent), mediate  (or  consequent),  or  both  conjoinod  and  inseparable.  That  is,  whether 
the  imputation  of  the  guilt  of  Adam's  sin  preceded  or  followed  the  guilt  of  man's 
inherent  and  hereditary  depravity.  C  GuUl  is  here  used  in  the  technical  sense  of 
*  liability  to  punishment,'  not  in  the  ethical  sense  of  sinfulness.)     This  distinction  was 


90  ROMANS  V.  [5:  21. 

not  made  by  Augustine  and  the  Reformers.  But  examining  their  views  in  the  light 
of  subsequent  discussions,  we  may  say  that  both  kinds  of  imputation  were  recognized 
by  them  ;  some  laying  stress  upon  one  side,  some  on^the  other,  but  not  to  the  exclusion 
of  either.  It  was  only  in  later  times  that  the  two  were  sharply  defined,  in  order  to 
divide  them. 

2.  Mediate  (or  consequent)  imputation  makes  inherent  depravity  derived  from 
Adam,  and  this  alone,  the  ground  of  condemnation.  This  view,  however,  as  a  mutter 
of  history,  passes  rapidly  into  a  denial  of  any  imputation. 

3.  Immediate  (or  antecedent)  imputation,  as  opposed  to  mediAte  imputation,  makes 
the  sin  of  Adam,  as  the  sin  of  the  federal  head  of  the  race,  tlie  exclusive  ground  of 
condemnation,  independently  of,  and  prior  to,  native  depravity  and  personal  trans- 
gressions. Hereditary  guilt  precedes  hereditary  sin.  From  this  view  the  transition 
was  easy  to  the  next  theory. 

V.  The  FEDERAL  theory  of  a  vicarious  repiesentation  of  mankind  by  Adam,  in  vir- 
tue of  a  covenant  {fsedus,  hence  '  federal ')  made  with  him.  It  supposes  a  (one-sided) 
covenant,  called  the  covenant  of  works  (in  distinction  from  the  covenant  of  grace),  to 
the  effect  that  Adam  should  stand  a  moral  probation  on  behalf  of  all  his  descendants, 
so  that  his. act  of  obedience  or  disobedience,  with  all  its  consequences,  should  be 
accounted  theirs,  just  as  the  righteousness  of  the  second  Adam  is  reckoned  as  that  of 
His  people.  This  transaction,  because  unilateral  (one-sided),  finds  its  ultimate  ground 
in  the  sovereign  pleasure  of  God.  It  is  a  part  of  the  theological  system  developed  in 
Holland,  and  largely  incorporated  in  the  standards  of  the  Westminster  Assembly. 
Yet  here,  too,  a  distinction  has  been  made. 

1.  The  founders  and  chief  advocates  of  the  federal  scheme  combined  with  it  the 
Augustinian  view  of  an  unconscious  and  impersonal  participation  of  the  v\  hole  human 
race  in  the  fall  of  Adam,  and  thus  made  imputation  to  rest  on  ethical  as  well  as  legal 
grounds.  This  view,  which  differs  very  slightly  from  IV.,  seems  to  accoid  best  with 
the  four  leading  points  of  this  section,  since  it  recognizes  Adam  as  both  federal  and 
natural  head  of  the  race. 

2.  The  purely  federal  school  holds,  that  by  virtue  of  the  federal  headship  of  Adam, 
on  the  ground  of  a  sovereign  arrangement,  his  sin  and  guilt  are  justly,  directly,  and 
immediately  imputed  to  his  posterity.  It  makes  the  parallel  between  Adam  and 
Christ  exact,  in  the  matter  of  the  imputation  of  sin  and  of  righteousness.  '  In  virtue 
of  the  union  between  him  and  his  descendants,  his  sin  is  the  judicial  ground  of  the 
condemnation  of  the  race,  precisely  as  the  righteousness  of  Christ  is  the  judicial 
ground  of  the  justification  of  His  people.'  This  view  does  not  deny  that  Adam  is  the 
natural  head  of  the  race,  but  asserts  that  'over  and  beyond  this  natural  relation 
which  exists  between  a  man  and  his  posterity,  there  was  a  special  divine  constitution 
by  which  he  was  appointed  the  head  and  representative  of  his  whole  race '  (Hodge, 
Theology,  ii.,  pp.  195,  197). 

VI.  In  sharp  antagonism  to  the  last  view,  most  of  the  recent  New  England  theolo- 
gians have  virtually  rejected  imputation  altogether.  They  '  maintain  that  the  sinful- 
ness of  the  descendants  of  Adam  results  with  infallible  certainty  (though  not  with  ne- 
cessity) from  his  transgression;  the  one  class  holding  to  hereditary  depravity  prior  to 
sinful  choice,  the  other  class  teaching  that  the  first  moral  choice  of  all  is  universally 
sinful,  yet  with  the  power  uf  contrary  choice.'  In  this  view  a  nice  disl;inction  is  made 
between  natural  ability  and  moral  inability.  When  consistently  held,  it  denies  that 
^all  sinned'  (ver.  12)  refers  to  the  sin  of  Adam,  taking  it  as  equivalent  to  the  perfect, 
'all  have  siun«d,"  namely,  personally  with  the  first  responsible  act. 


6:  ]  ROMANS  VI.  'Jl 

VII.  The  Semi-Pelagian  and  kindred  Arminian  theories,  though  differing  from 
each  other,  agree  in  admitting  the  Adamic  unity,  and  the  disastrous  eflects  of  Adam's 
transgression,  but  regard  hereditary  corruption  as  an  evil  or  misfurtuns.%  n^t  properly 
as  sin  and  guilt,  of  itself  exposing  us  to  punishment.  Ariuiuiuuism,  however,  on  this 
point,  inclines  toward  Augustinianism  more  than  Semi-Pelagianism  does.  The  l.jtter 
fails  to  give  full  force  to  the  language  of  the  Apustle  in  this  section,  and  to  sympathize 
with  his  profound  sense  of  the  guilt  and  sinfulness  of  sin.  The  advucatis  of  neither 
theory  present  explicit  and  uniform  statements  on  this  doctrinal  point. 

Those  views  which  seem  to  keep  most  closely  to  the  grammatical  sense  of  the  Apos- 
tle's words  involves  mysteries  of  physiology,  psychology,  ethics,  and  theology.  Out- 
side the  revelation  there  confronts  us  the  undeniable,  stubborn,  terrible  fact,  of  the 
universal  dominion  of  sin  and  death  over  the  entire  race,  infants  as  we  1  as  adults. 
No  system  of  philosophy  explains  this ;  outside  the  Chriotian  redi-mption,  the  mys- 
tery is  entirely  one  of  darkness,  unillumined  by  the  greatest  mystery  of  love.  Hence 
the  wisdom  of  following  as  closely  as  possible  the  words  which  reveal  the  cure,  as  we 
attempt  to  penetrate  the  gloom  that  envelops  the  origin  of  the  disease.  The  more  so 
when  the  obvious  purpose  of  the  .Apostle  here  is  to  bring  into  proper  prominence  the 
Person  and  Work  of  the  Second  Adam.  Here  alone  can  we  find  any  practical  solution 
of  the  problem  respecting  the  first  head  of  the  race;  only  herein  do  we  perceive  the 
triumphant  vindication  of  Divine  justice  and  mercy.  The  best  help  to  unity  in  the 
doctrine  of  Original  Sin  will  be  by  larger  experiences  of  the  'much  more'  which  ia 
our  portion  in  Christ  Jesus.  Only  when  we  are  assured  of  righteousness  and  life  ia 
Him,  can  we  fearlessly  face  the  fact  of  sin  and  death  in  Adam. 

Chapters  6-8. 

3.  Moral  Results  of  Justification;  those  Justified  by  Faith  Live  a  New 
Life  in  the  Spirit. 

The  gospel  is  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  ;  through  it  the  will  is  affected,  and 
thus  is  accomplished  moralhj  what  the  law  could  not  do,  namely,  the  sanctification  of 
those  born  sinners.  But  just  here  the  greatest  objection  is  raised  to  the  doctrine  of 
free  salvation;  and  with  this  obje  tion  the  Apostle  begins  his  discussion  : — 

I.  The  gospel  method  of  grace  does  not  lead  to  sin  but  to  hoiness;  chap.  6. 

(1.)  Because  of  what  is  necessarily  involved  in  the  new  life  (vers.  2-11);  (2.)  those 
who  partake  of  this  new  life  are  dead  to  sin  and  dedicated  to  God  (vers.  12-23). 

II.  The  relation  of  Christians  to  the  law  :  it  is  in  itself  just  and  good,  but  powerless 
to  sanctify  ;  chap.  7. 

(1.)  .Believers  are  freed  from  the  law  (vers.  1-6),  but  (2.)  this  does  not  prove  that 
the  law  is  sin ;  for,  as  it  has  been  proven  that  it  cannot  justify,  it  now  appears  that 
though  holy  it  cannot  make  sinners  holy  (vers.  7-25). 

III.  The  sanctifying  work  of  the  Spirit,  the  free  life  in  the  Spirit  over  against  the 
life  in  the  flesh  ;  chap.  S  (see  further  analysis  there). 


92  ROMANS  VI.  [6:  1-3. 

Chapter  6:  1-11. 
Felloivship  in  the  Death  of  Christ  involves  a  New  Life. 

1  What  shall  we  say  then  ?     Shall  we  continue  in  sin, 

2  that  grace  may  abound  ?     God  forbid.     We  who  died 

3  to  sin,  how  shall  we  any  longer  live  therein?     Or  are 

Chapter  6. 

I.  Grace  does  not  Leab  to  Six. 

(1.)  Fellowship  in  the  Death  of  Christ  Involves  a  New  Life,  vers.  1-11. 

The  objection  with  which  the  discussion  opens,  which  has  been  repeatedly  urged 
against  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith,  shows  conclusively  what  Paul  meant  by 
that  doctrine,  namely,  that  God  accounts  men  righteous  when  they  believe  in  Christ. 
Otherwise  the  objection  would  not  have  been  raised,  nor  the  subsequent  discussion 
necessary.  But  this  discussion  shows  that  the  Apostle  used  the  term  '  death '  and 
'  life '  in  the  widest  sense.  We  do  not  continue  in  sin,  he  aigues,  that  grace  may 
abound  (vers.  1,  2),  for  our  baptism  indicated  fellowship  with  Christ,  and  this  f<-llo\v- 
ehip  is  dying  to  sin  and  living  to  God  (vers.  3-11).  The  section  is  not  so  much  an 
argument  as  an  appeal  to  Christian  experience.  The  error  it  opposes  is  extirpated 
by  a  vital  and  growing  knowledge  of  the  saving  power  of  Christ  in  the  gospel. 

Ver,  1.  What  shall  -we  say  then  ?  'Then,'  in  view  of  chap.  5. 
20,  21.  Comp.  the  similar  phrase  in  chap.  4:  1. —  Shall  we  con- 
tinue in  sin  ?  The  form  of  the  question  in  the  original  indicates 
that  this  is  the  statement  of  a  point  to  be  discussed,  or  rather  of  a 
wrong  inference  that  might  be  drawn  from  the  abounding  of  grace. 
This  wrong  inference  is  a  standing  objection  to  the  gospel,  urged  by 
those  who  have  not  felt  its  power. 

Ver.  2.  God  forbid.  Comp.  note  on  chap.  3 :  4.  Here,  as  there, 
an  indignant  denial:  '  let  it  not  be  that  we  continue  in  sin.' — We 
•who.  'We  who  are  of  such  a  kind  as.' — Died  to  sin.  Not,  'are 
dead.'  When  this  death  'with  respect  to  sin'  took  place  is  shown  in 
vers.  3,  4.  There  is  throughout  an  implied  appeal  to  Christian  con- 
sciousness, as  witnessing  the  ethical  change.  The  remission  of  sin, 
which  is  signified  and  sealed  by  baptism,  involves  a  death  to  sin.  The 
reference,  therefore,  is  to  the  time  of  baptism,  which,  in  the  Apostolic 
church,  usually  coincided  with  conversion  and  justification.  This  is 
preferable  to  the  view  that  the  reference  is  to  Christ's  death  and  our 
fellowship  in  it.  Observe,  that  the  Apostle  assumes  the  inseparable 
connection  between  justification  and  sanctification,  and  yet  distinguishes 
them  ;  the  justified  man  is  sanctified,  not  the  reverse. 

Ver.  3,  Or  are  ye  ignorant.  '  If  this  is  doubtful,  then  I  appeal 
directly  to  your  experimental  knowledge.' — All  we  vrho,  referring 
to  the  same  persons  as  in  ver.  2  ;  all  without  exception. — Were  bap- 
tized into  Christ  Jesus.     '  Into,'  in  such  expressions,  does  not 


6 :  4, 5.]  ROMANS  VI.  93 

ye  ignorant  that  all  we  who  were  baptized  into  Christ 

4  Jesus  were  baptized  into  his  death  ?  We  were  buried 
therefore  with  him  through  baptism  into  death  :  that 
like  as  Christ  was  raised  from  the  dead  through  the 
glory  of  the  Father,  so  we  also  might  walk  in  newness 

5  of  life.     For  if  we  have  become  ^  united  with  him  by 

1  Or,  united  with  the  likeness  .  .  .  with  the  likeness. 

point  to  the  external  element  (although  immersion  was,  and  in  the 
East  still  is,  the  usual  mode),  but  has  a  far  deeper  meaning.  Baptism 
into  Christ  Jesus  was  the  sign  of  participation  in  Him,  union  with 
Him,  and  the  Apostle  asserts  that  they  all  knew  that  this  union  meant 
fellowship  with  His  death,  so  that  they  were  baptized  into  his 
death ;  hence  with  Him  they  die  unto  sin.  The  reference  to  baptism 
does  not  suggest  baptismal  regeneration ;  it  both  connects  and  dis- 
tinguishes baptism  and  regeneration,  as  the  visible  sign  and  the  in- 
visible grace  of  the  renewing  Spirit.  '  Let  us  not  sepai-ate  what  the 
Lord  has  joined  together.  We  ought,  in  baptism,  to  recognize  a 
spiritual  laver ;  we  ought  in  it  to  embrace  a  witness  to  the  remission 
of  sins  and  a  pledge  of  our  renewal ;  and  yet  so  to  leave  both  to  Christ 
and  the  Holy  Spirit  the  honor  that  is  theirs,  as  that  no  part  of  the 
salvation  be  transferred  to  thi-  sign.'      (Calvin.) 

Ver.  4.  We  were  buried  therefore  w^ith  him  through  bap- 
tism. A  stronger  expression  than  that  of  the  last  verse.  That  the 
custom  of  baptism  by  immersion  is  alluded  to  is  generally  admitted, 
but  the  emersion  is  as  significant  as  the  immersion.  The  death  of  the 
old  man  is  at  the  same  time  the  birth  of  the  new.  One  form  may  be 
more  striking  than  another,  may  have  the  earliest  usage  in  its  fovor ; 
but  it  seems  improper  to  make  the  efficacy  of  the  rite  depend  upon  the 
quantity  of  water,  or  upon  the  mode  of  its  application. — Into  his 
death;  for  the  appropriation  of  its  full  benefit,  namely,  the  remission 
of  sins  and  reconciliation  with  God. — That  ( '  in  order  that' )  as  Christ 
"was  raised,  etc.  The  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ  stand  to- 
gether; so  the  Christian  who  is  in  fellowship  with  Christ,  shares  in 
His  life. — Through  the  glory  of  the  Father.  '  The  glorious  col- 
lective perfection  of  God  certainly  effected  the  raising  of  Jesus  chiefly 
as  omnipotence  (1  Cor.  6:  14;  2  Cor.  13:  4;  Eph.  1  :  19,  etc.);  but 
the  comprehensive  significance  of  the  word — selected  with  conscious 
solemnity,  and  in  highest  accordance  with  the  glorious  victory  of  the 
Son — is  not  to  be  curtailed  on  that  account'  (Meyer). — In  ne-wness 
of  life  ;  this  is  more  emphatic  than  '  a  new  life ' :  a  life  which  never 
grows  old,  whose  characteristic  '  newness '  is  imperishable. 

Ver.  5.  For  if.  A  confirmatory  explanation  of  ver,  4;  'if  being 
almost  equivalent  to  '  since.' — Have  become  united.  '  Planted 
together'  (A.  V.)  is  incorrect;  the  figure  is  that  of  vital  connection; 
*  with  Him'  is  implied  in  the  original.     Some  suggest  '  grafted  into ; ' 


94  ROMANS  VI.  [6 :  6,  7. 

the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  shall  be  also  hy  the  like- 

6  ness  of  his  resurrection ;  knowing  this  that  our  old  man 
was  crucified  with  Am,  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be 
done  away,  that  so  we  should  no  longer  be  in  bondage 

7  to  sin  ;  for  he  that  hath  died  is  justified  *  from  sin. 

*  Add  marg.     Or,  released. — Am.  Com. 

but  this  is  a  different  figure. — By  the  likeness  of  his  death.     The 

rendering  'by'  accepts  this  phrase  as  instrumental,  i.  e.,  we  became 
united  with  Christ  through  the  likeness  of  His  death  ;  with  a  latent 
reference  to  baptism.  Others,  more  correctly,  supply  '  in  '  or  '  into,' 
and  explain  the  likeness  of  His  death  as  '  the  condition  corresponding 
in  similarity  of  form  to  His  death,  which  has  specifically  and  indisso- 
lubly  become  ours'  (Meyer).  Our  vital  union  with  Him  involves 
death  to  sin  (vers.  3,  4). — We  shall  be  (/.  e.,  become  united  with 
Him)  also  by  the  likeness  of  his  resurrection.  If  the  pre- 
vious clause  means :  '  united  unto  Christ  by  the  likeness  of  His  death,' 
then  this  must  be  explained  accordingly.  The  whole  points  to  the 
certainty  of  the  other  result  of  vital  union  with  Christ;  newness  of 
life  as  truly  as  death  to  sin      Thus  continuance  in  sin  is  doubly  denied. 

Ver.  6.  Knowing  this,  or,  'since  Ave  know  this.'  'This'  refers 
to  what  follows,  the  whole  defining  the  last  clause  of  ver.  5. — That 
our  old  man.  Our  sinful  nature  is  here  personified  (comp.  Eph.  4: 
22  ;  Col.  3  :  9)  ;•  almost  equivalent  to  '  flesh,'  in  the  ethical  spuse,  as 
used  in  chaps.  7,  8,  and  elsewhere. — Was  crucified  with  him. 
Not  necessarily  at  baptism,  but  when  <'hrist  died,  in  virtue  of  our 
union  with  Him  (comp.  Gal.  2  :  20). — That  the  body  of  sin.  Of 
this  phrase  there  are  three  leading  explanations  :  fl.)  The  body  as  the 
seat  of  sin  ;  this  is  contrary  to  the  view  of  the  body  which  Paul  es- 
pecially presents.  (2.)  The  body,  so  far  as  it  remains  under  the  power 
of  the  old  man,  '  sin  '  being  a  possessiye  genitive.  This  is  less  objec- 
tionable, but  seems  a  confusing  of  the  literal  and  figurative  senses. 
(3.)  Sin  is  conceived  as  an  organism,  with  many  members;  the  whole 
is  but  another  form  of  the  expression,  'our  old  man.'  This  is,  on  the 
whole,  preferable,  since  even  (2.)  leads  to  ascetic  inferences  which  are 
quite  unpauline. — Should  no  longer  be  in  bondage  to  (or  '  be 
the  slaves  of ' )  sin.  Another  form  of  expressing  the  destruction  of 
the  organism  of  sin,  which  is  represepted  as  a  master  who  holds  us  in 
bondage. 

Ver.  7.  For  he  that  hath  died.  '  He  that  died  '  is  more  literal, 
but  '  hath  died '  better  expresses  the  relation  to  what  follows. — Is 
justified  from  sin.  This  is  the  permanent  result.  The  word  'jus- 
tified' is  to  be  taken  here  in  its  strictly  legal  sense,  absolved,  acquit- 
ted, freed  (see  marg.  of  Am.  Com.)  There  are  three  views  in  regard 
to  the  meaning  of  '  hath  died  ' :  (1.)  Physical  death  ;  the  whole  verse 
being  a  proverb:  he  who  has  died  is  freed  from  sin.  The  application 
to  spiritually  dying  to  sin  is  afterwards  made.     Meyer  modifies  this 


6:  8-10.]  ROMANS  VI.  95 

8  But  if  we  died  with  Christ,  we  believe  that  we  shall 

9  also  live  with  him  ;  knowing  that  Christ  being  raised 
from  the  dead  dieth  no  more;  death  no  more  hath  do- 

10  minion  over  him.     For  ^  the  death  that  he  died,  he 
died  unto  sin  ^  once  :  but  ^  the  life  that  he  liveth,  he 

1  Or,  in  that.  2  Gr.  cnice  for  all. 

view :  in  so  far  as  the  dead  person  sins  no  more.  The  reference  to 
physical  death  is  favored  by  the  connection  ('for')  with  what  pre- 
cedes. (2.)  Moral  death.  But  death  to  sin  is  the  result,  not  the 
ground  of  justification.  (3.)  Death  with  Christ  {mystical  or  spiritual 
death)  justifies  the  sinner,  frees  him  from  its  guilt  and  punishment. 
This  thought  is  true  enough,  but  seems  inappropriate  here,  wh^re  the 
Apostle  is  giving  a  reason  for  ver.  6.  Besides,  dying  with  Christ  is 
plainly  expressed  in  the  next  verse.  We  prefer  (1),  regarding  the 
verse  as  a  proverbial  maxim.  *As  natural  death  cuts  off  all  commu- 
nication with  life,  so  must  sanctifieation  in  the  soul  cut  off  all  commu- 
nication with  sin'  (Henry). 

Ver.  8.  But  if  we  died  with  Christ.  That  this  is  the  fact  has 
been  already  stated,  forming  the  underlying  thought  of  vers.  3-6. — 
We  believe,  etc.  The  argument  is  plain,  but  the  exact  force  of  live 
with  him  is  doubtful.  It  seems  best  to  accept  a  primary  reference 
to  sanctifieation,  to  ethical  fellowship  with  Christ.  To  this  some  add 
the  thought  of  eternal  life,  others  apply  the  phrase  to  this  exclusively. 

Ver.  9.  Knowing;  'since  we  know.'  The  ground  of  our  belief 
is  the  knowledge  of  His  enduring  life,  after  Pis  triumphant  resurrec- 
tion.—Being  raised  from  the  dead.  The  resurrection  is  the 
pledge  of  His  enduring  life. — No  more  hath  dominion  over 
him.  It  had  dominion  over  Him,  as  God  decreed  (chap.  5 :  8-10)  and 
as  He  voluntarily  gave  Himself  up  to  it,  but  there  its  power  ended. 
The  sentence  stands  independently.  The  transitoriness  of  the  do- 
minion of  death  is  thus  emphasized  by  the  form  of  expression. 
(Comp.  Acts  13  :  34.)  Unless  our  Saviour  is  now  undying,  we  cannot 
be  sure  of  living  in  and  with  Him. 

Ver.  10.  For  the  death  that  he  died.  Lit.,  'that  which  he 
died,'  which  is  bet  paraphrased  as  we  give  it.— He  died  unto  sin 
once  (Gr.  'once  for  all')  ;  no  repetition  was  necessary.  This  is  the 
proof  that  death  has  dominion  over  Him  no  more :  His  death  was 
'  unto  sin,'  it  could  have  nothing  more  to  do  with  Him,  hence  death 
could  have  power  over  Him  no  more.  Some  refer  the  clause  to 
Christ's  expiating  sin ;  others  to  His  expiating  and  removing 
it;  others,  in  view  of  ver.  11,  explain  it  of  His  being  freed 
from  sin.  '  In  both  cases  the  idea  of  separation  is  expressed  ; 
but  in  the  case  of  the  believer,  it  is  separation  from  personal, 
indwelling  sin  ;  in  that  of  Christ,  it  is  separation  from  the  burden 
of  His  people's  sin,  which  He  bore  upon  the  cross'  (Hodge).     The 


96  ROMANS  VI.  [6;  H,  12. 

11  liveth  unto  God.  Even  so  reckon  ye  also  yourselves 
to  be  dead  unto  sin,  but  alive  unto  God  in  Christ 
Jesus. 

Chapter  6  :  12-23. 
Christians  are  Dead  to  Sin,  and  Dedicated  to  God, 

12  Let  not  sin  therefore  reign  in  your  mortal  body, 
that  ye  should  obey  the  lusts  thereof :  neither  present 

emphatic  'once  for  all'  shows  that  this  sacrifice  needs  no  repetition  ; 
foi-  His  dying  again  no  reason  can  exist. — He  liveth  unto  God. 
Christ's  life  on  earth  was  also  a  life  '  unto  God,'  but  in  conflict  with 
sin  and  death  ;  having  triumphed  over  these  at  his  resurrection,  He 
now  lives  unto  God  in  the  fullest  sense.  This,  too,  proves  that  death 
has  dominion  over  Him  no  more. 

Ver.  11.  Even  so.  This  is  an  inference  and  the  application  to 
the  readers. — Reckon  ye.  The  word  may  be  either  imperative,  or 
indicative  :  the  former  suits  the  context  best. — Also  ;  like  Christ  (ver. 
10). — Dead  unto  sin.  The  notion  of  reckoning  that  they  died /or 
sin,  in  and  with  Christ,  seems  contrary  to  the  whole  argument  of  the 
passage.— But  alive  unto  God  in  Christ  Jesus.  Only  in  fellow- 
ship with  Christ  Jesus  can  we  reckon  ourselves  dead  unto  sin  and 
alive  unto  God.  The  negative  and  positive  sides  of  the  new  moral 
life  are  based  upon  fellowship  with  the  Personal  Redeemer  who  died 
and  rose  again.  The  exhortation  is  to  an  apprehension  ('reckon')  of 
this  as  a  motive  for  holy  living.  Hence  the  utter  impossiblity  of  our 
continuing  in  sin  that  grace  may  abound  (ver.  1).  The  obvious  infer- 
ence is  that  dying  to  sin  and  living  to  God  is  the  evidence  (and  the 
only  valid  evidence)  of  our  fellowship  with  Christ.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  way  is  thus  prepared  for  enforcing  the  thought,  so  essential 
in  Paul's  argument  (and  equally  so  in  Christian  experience),  that  fel- 
lowship with  Christ,  and  not  the  pressure  of  law,  is  the  fundamental 
fact  in  a  life  of  holiness.  Christian  morality  cannot  exist  without 
Christ. 

(2.)  Christians  are  Dead  to  Sin,  and  Dedicated  to  God,  vers.  12-23. 
The  exhortation  of  ver.  11  is  expanded  in  vers.  12-14;  the  negative  part  ('dead 
unto  sin')  in  vers.  12,13  a;  the  positive  part  ('alive  unto  God')  in  vers.  13  fe,  14. 
But  the  concluding  motive  :  '  for  ye  are  not  under  the  law,  but  under  grace,'  suggests 
another  objection,  namely,  that  this  would  imply  freedom  to  sin  (ver.  15).  This  ob- 
jection the  Apostle  answers  by  carrying  out  in  detail  an  illustration  from  service. 
Christians  are  no  longer  servants  of  sin,  with  the  wages  of  death  ;  but  servants  of 
righteousness  (servants  of  God),  thus  becoming  sanctified,  and  receiving  as  the  gift  of 
God  •  eternal  life  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.'  (The  section  is  preliminary  to  chap.  7, 
•which  shows  more  fully  that  we  are  '  not  under  the  law,  but  under  grace.') 

Ver.  12.     Let  not  sin  therefore.     *  Therefore,'  i.  e.,  because  you 


6:  13,  14.]  ROMANS   VI.  97 

13  your  members  unto  sin  as  ^  instruments  of  unrighteous- 
ness ;  but  present  yourselves  unto  God,  as  alive  from 
the  dead,  and  your  members  as  ^  instruments  of  right- 

14  eousness  unto  God.     For  sin  shall  not  have  dominion 

1  Or,  weapons. 

reckon  yourselves  dead  unto  sin,  etc.  (ver.  11) — Reign.  'It  is  no 
matter  of  comparison  between  reigning  and  indwelling  merely,  but  between 
reigning  and  being  deposed'  (Alford). — In  your  mortal  body.  This 
is  to  be  taken  literally,  and  not  referred  to  a  body  dead  to  sin,  or  to  a 
corrupt  body.  The  connection  with  ver.  11  suggests  that  this  'mortal 
body'  is  under  the  power  of  sin  ;  but  it  is  the  mortality  of  the  body 
that  is  emphasized,  in  contrast  with  the  life  we  have  in  fellowship 
with  Chiist  who  dieth  no  more  (ver.  9)  ;  hence,  to  allow  sin  to  reign 
there  is  contrary  to  living  'unto  God  in  Christ  Jesus'  (ver.  11). — 
That  ye  should  obey  the  lusts  thereof.  So  the  briefer  and  better 
established  reading.  The  reign  of  sin  in  our  mortal  body  would  have 
as  its  aim  obedience  to  the  desires  of  the  body,  which  are  sinful,  be- 
cause we  are  sinful.  Obeying  these  is  living  unto  sin,  hence  opposed 
to  the  piinciple  of  ver.  11. 

Ver  13.  Neither;  'and  especially  not.' — Present  (so  chap.  12  :  1) 
is  preferable  to  '  yield,'  since  the  latter  conveys  the  idea  of  previous 
resistance  ;  the  thought  is  of  placing  at  the  disposal  of  another  ;  pro- 
bably the  figure  of  military  service  is  suggested. — Your  members, 
'the  various  parts  of  the  body  which  can  be  used  in  the  service  of 
sin.  If  '  mortal  body'  (ver.  12)  is  taken  figuratively,  then  'members' 
must  be  taken  accordingly. — As  instruments,  or,  *  weapons.'  The 
latter  sense  is  more  literal,  and  accords  better  with  the  Apostle's 
usage,  with  the  figure  of  military  service. — Of  unrighteousness; 
opposed  to  'righteousness,'  not  simply  immorality. — Unto  sin.  Per- 
sonified as  ruler  (comp.  ver.  12). — But  present  yourselves  to 
God ;  the  new  and  true  ruler.  The  command  is  to  present  themselves 
entirely,  once  for  all  (the  tense  in  the  original  is  not  the  same  as  in 
the  previous  clause).— As  alive  from  the  dead.  Regarding  your- 
selves as  those  that  are  alive,  almost=since  you  are.  There  seems  to 
be  no  thought  of  a  battle-field,  but  rather  of  ver.  11. — Your  mem- 
bers, etc.  This  is  a  more  particular  statement  of  the  previous  exhor- 
tation, corresponding  with  the  first  clause  of  the  verse. — Unto  God; 
not,  'for  God,'  which  disturbs  the  parallelism. 

Ver.  14.  For  sin,  etc.  The  future  tense  is  that  of  confident  as- 
sertion, and  hence  of  consolation.  It  is  not  a  new  exhortation. — For 
ye  are  not  under  law,  etc.  This  is  the  reason  sin  shall  not  have 
dominion.  '  Freedom  from  the  law  gives  you  so  little  freedom  to  sin, 
that  it  is  only  by  the  exercise  of  grace  upon  you  that  your  freedom 
from  sin  has  begun '  (Lange.)  Here  the  Apostle  prepares  for  the  fuller 
discussion  as  to  the  powerlessness  of  the  law  to  sanctify  as  well  as  to 
justify.  If  the  reason  sin  will  not  lord  it  over  us,  is  that  we  are  not 
7 


98  ROMANS  VI.  [6:  15-17. 

over  you  :  for  ye  are  not  under  the  law,  but  under  grace. 

15  AVhat  then  ?  shall  we  sin,  because  we  are  not  under 

16  law,  but  under  grace?  God  forbid.  Know  ye  not, 
that  to  whom  ye  present  yourselves  as  ^servants 
unto  obedience,  his  ^servants  ye  are  w^hom  ye  obey; 
whether    of   sin  unto    death,  or    of   obedience    unto 

17  righteousness?     But  thanks  be  to  God,  ^that,  whereas 

1  Gr.  bond-servants.  2  Qr,  thai  ye  were  .  .  .  but  ye  become. 

undei'  the  law,  but  under  grace,  then  grace  sanctifies  us,  not  the  law. 
(Comp.  chap.  7  thi-oughout.) 

Ver.  15.  "What  then?  shall -we  sin,  etc.  This  objection  has 
been  raised  ever  since.  It  is  not  precisely  the  same  as  that  suggested 
in  ver.  1 :  there  the  objection  was  that  free  pardon  would  encourage 
us  to  continue  in  sin  ;  here  the  objection  is  that  freedom  from  the  law 
leads  to  freedom  in  sinning.  The  connection  with  chap.  7,  as  well  as 
the  entire  argument  in  chaps.  6-8,  points  to  sanctification  by  grace, 
and  forbids  an  exclusive  reference  to  the  grace  of  justification. — God 
forbid ;  as  usual.  The  denial  is  expanded  in  what  follows.  The 
legal  heart  makes  the  objection  ;  but  the  loyal  heart  makes  this  indig- 
nant denial. 

Ver.  16.  Know  ye  not.  'I  take  it  for  granted  that  ye  know 
and  believe'  (Stuart). — To  whom  ye  present  yourselves,  etc. 
This  principle  is  obvious  :  To  present  yourselves  as  servants  to  any 
one  implies  service  to  that  one  :  in  this  matter  the  masters  are  opposed, 
hence  -whether,  ...  or,  there  is  no  third. — Of  sin  unto  death. 
Both  terms  are  used  in  the  usual  wide  sense  :  '  sin  '  is  personified  as 
the  master,  the  result  of  the  service  is  '  death,'  including  all  the  con- 
sequences of  sin.— Of  obedience  unto  righteousness.  Here 
'  righteousness  '  refers  not  to  justification,  but  to  inwrought  righteous- 
ness, not  excluding  the  final  verdict  at  the  judgment.  Meyer  accepts 
the  latter  sense  alone.  The  more  exact  piU'allelism  would  be:  'of 
righteousness  unto  life.'  The  deviation  may  be  thus  explained :  Of 
our  own  free  choice  we  give  ourselves  as  bondmen  to  sin,  but  cannot 
thus  give  ourselves  to  righteousness :  we  can  only  yield  ours-^lves  up 
to  God's  grace,  to  save  us,  as  servants  of  obedience,  unto  righteousness, 
given  to  us  and  inwrought  of  the  Holy  Ghost  f  so  Forbes).  In  vf^r.  18, 
•  servants  of  righteousness'  occurs,  after  'being  made  free  from  sin.' 

Ver.  17.  But  thanks  be  to  God.  In  reminding  them  which 
of  these  masters  they  served  (ver.  16),  his  heart  speaks.  —  That, 
whereas  ye  were  the  servants  of  sin.  '  Were '  is  emphatic ; 
this  state  is  past,  and  for  this  the  Apostle  is  thankful,  although  this 
negative  side  of  salvation  cannot  be  separated  from  the  positive. — Ye 
became  obedient  from  the  heart.  The  moral  change  at  conver- 
sion made  their  true,  internal  attitude  that  of  obedience. — That  form 
of  teaching  whereunto  ye  were  delivered.    This  rendering  is 


6 :  18,  19.]  ROMANS  YI.  99 

ye  were  ^servants  of  sin,  ye  became  obedient  from 

the    heart    to    that    ^form    of    teaching    whereunto 

IS  ye    were    delivered ;    and    being    made    free    from 

19  sin,  ye  became  ^  servants  of  righteousness.     I  speak 

after  the  manner  of  men  because  of  tho  mfirmity 

1  Gr.  bond-servatUs.  -  Or,  pattern. 

greatly  to  be  preferred  to  that  of  the  A,  V.  The  change  to  the  passive 
suggests  the  Divine  agency  in  delivering  them  to  this  •  form  of  teach- 
ing.' This  phrase,  literally,  'type  of  teaching,'  is  interpreted:  (1) 
of  Christian  doctrine  in  general ;  which  is  objectionable,  because  in 
that  case  'type'  would  be  unmeaning ;  (2)  of  the  Pauline  teaching, 
over  against  the  Judaistic  forms  of  Christianity;  (3)  of  the  ideal,  or 
'pattern,'  presented  by  the  gospel,  the  ethical  rule  of  life  it  gives. 
The  second  interpretation  is  the  best.  Obedience  to  this  type  of 
teaching,  over  against  legalism,  is  something  for  which  to  thank  God; 
because  it  is  God  s  work,  and  because  it  is  worthy  of  thanks.  It  fol- 
lows that  it  is  important  to  know  what  Paul's  teaching  is.  The  next 
verse  is  closely  connected  with  this;  a  semicolon  has  therefore  been 
substituted  for  the  period  of  the  A.  V. 

Ver.  18.  And  being  made  free,  etc.  This  is  not  the  conclusion 
from  what  precedes,  but  a  continuation  of  ver.  17.  The  single  act  of 
deliverance  and  transformation  is  referred  to. — Became  servants, 
personally  and  wholly  belonging  to  this  service.  This  bondage  is  real 
freedom.     Compare  the  opposite  thought  in  ver.  20. 

Ver.  19.  I  speak  after  the  manner  of  men.  '  I  take  a  figure 
from  human  relations,  in  thus  leptescnting  Christian  freedom  as  a 
bond  service.'  (The  phrase  differs  from  that  used  in  cliap.  3:  5,  but 
there  seems  to  be  no  marked  difference  of  thought.) — Because  of 
the  infirmity  of  your  flesh.  Because  of  the  intellectual  weakness 
resulting  from  the  'flesh,'  which  is  here  used  in  the  ethical  sense,  of 
depraved  human  nature  (see  chap.  7).  Others  refer  the  phrase  to 
moral  weakness,  and  explain  :  '  I  require  nothing  which  your  fleshly 
weakness  could  not  do,'  and  then  join  it  with  what  follows:  'for  I  only 
require  such  service  as  ye  formerly  rendered  to  sin.'  This  is  open  to 
serious  objection,  as  lowering  the  moral  standard  presented  by  the 
Apostle. — For  as,  etc.  This  explains  what  was  stated  in  ver.  18. — 
Servants  to  uncleanness,  moral  defilement,  and  to  iniquity, 
violation  of  Gods  law,  the  two  sides  of  'sin'  fver.  13). — Unto  ini- 
quity. This  may  mean:  in  order  to  work  iniquity,  or,  resulting  in 
iniquity;  the  latter,  pointing  to  a  state,  rather  than  an  act,  seems 
preferable. — So  also,  etc.  The  explanation  changes  to  an  exhorta- 
tion, based  on  the  facts  of  their  experience,  both  before  and  since  con- 
version.— To  righteousness  unto  sanctification.  The  render- 
ing 'holiness'  (A.  V. )  points  to  the  ultimate  purpose  or  result;  'sanc- 
tification '  suggests  the  immediate  result,  coming  into  view  here  as  a 


100  KOMANS  VI.  [6:  20-22. 

of  your  flesh :  for  as  ye  presented  your  members 
as  servants  to  uncleanness  and  to  iniquity  unto  ini- 
quity, ev^en  so  now  present  your  members  as  servants 

20  to  righteousness  unto  sanctificatiou.      For  when   ye 
were  ^servants  of  sin,  ye  were  free  in  regard  of  right- 

21  eousness.     What  fruit  then  had  ye  at  that  time  in  the 
things  whereof  ye  are   now  ashamed  ?    for  the  end  of 

22  those  things  is  death.     But  now  being  made  free  from 

1  Gr.  bond-servants. 

progressive  state.  The  same  word  occurs  in  ver.  22,  and  the  meaning 
'  sanctification'  seems  preferable  there,  where  a  further  result  is 
spoken  of. 

Ver.  20,  For.  This  verse  '  restates  the  view  given  of  their  former 
condition  in  respect  to  sin  and  righteousness,  in  prepai-ation  for  the 
final  and  most  accui-ate  statement  of  their  present  spiritual  condition, 
ver.  22'  (Webster  and  Wilkinson).  Meyer  here  properly  calls  atten- 
tion to  the  tragical  force  of  emphatic  order  of  words  in  the  original. — 
When  ye  Tvere  servants  of  sin  (corap  ver.  17),  ye  were  free 
in  regard  of  righteousness.  The  only  freedom  they  had  was  this 
sad  freedom  as  respects  the  right  service  ;  the  deepest  slavery  in  fact, 
just  as  to  be  servants  of  righteousness  is  the  truest  freedom.  It  was 
not  that  they  counted  themselves  free,  or  that  righteousness  had  no 
claims  upon  them,  but  that,  as  a  terrible  fact,  they  were  uninfluenced 
by  its  demand^. 

Ver.  21.  What  fruit  therefore  had  ye  at  that  time  ;  in  this 
condition  before  conversion  (ver.  23).  Many  editors  and  commenta- 
tors punctuate  the  verse  so  as  to  read:  '  What  fruit  therefore  had  ye 
then?  Things  whereof  ye  are  now  ashamed.'  (The  R.  V.  does  not 
even  give  this  view  the  benefit  of  a  marginal  rendering.)  It  is  urged 
against  this  view  that  *  the  question  in  antithesis  to  ver.  21,  is  the 
having  of  fruit,  not  its  quality'  (Meyer),  and  that  the  answer,  which 
is  only  implied,  is:  ye  had  no  fruit  at  all,  for  the  end  is  death,  not 
fruitfulness.  Against  the  view  presented  in  the  A.  V.,  Alford  urges 
that  it  is  'inconsistent  with  the  New  Testament  meaning  of  fruit, 
which  is  "actions,"  the  fruit  of  the  man  considered  as  the  tree,  not 
"wages,"  or  "reward,"  the  fruit  of  his  actions.'  Either  view  is  gram- 
matically admissible,  and  both  have  been  advocated  for  centuries. — 
For  the  end  of  those  things  is  death  ;  here  in  its  most  compre- 
hensive meaning  in  contrast  with  close  of  ver.  22. 

Ver.  22.  But  now,  as  opposed  to  '  at  that  time'  (ver.  21),  being 
made  free  ;  comp.  ver.  18.— Servants  to  God.  *  God  Himself 
here  takes  the  place  of  "righteousness,"  for  their  relation  is  now  one 
of  personal  love'  (Lange). — Your  fruit  unto  sanctification,  as  in 
ver.  19  ;  but  even  more  appropriate  here.  They  are  having  fruit  now, 
in  contrast  either  with  their  having  no  fruit  '  then,'  or  with  the  evil 


6:  23—7:  1.].  ROMANS  II.  101 

sin,  and  become  servants  to  God,  ye  have  your  fruit 
23  unto  sanctification,  and  the  end  eternal  life.     For  the 
wages  of  sin  is  death ;  but  the  free  gift  of  God  is 
eternal  life  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord. 

Chapter  7  :  1-6. 

Christians  are  freed  from  the  Law. 

Or  are  ye  ignorant,  brethren  (for  I  speak  to  men 
that  know  Hhe  law),  how  that  the  law  hath  dominion 

Or,  law. 

fruit  in  their  previous  condition.  This  fruit  is  of  such  a  kind  as  at 
once  results  in  'sanctification,'  the  progressive  state,  the jiltimate  issue 
being  eternal  life.  This  is  to  be  taken  in  its  widest  sense  ;  we  al- 
ready have  eternal  life  in  germ  ;  in  its  fulness  is  the  '  end'  of  all  our 
fruit  and  fruitfulness.  But  this  end  is  not  attained  by  natural  laws  of 
development ;  each  course  of  conduct  has  its  inevitable  result,  but  for 
a  difiTerent  reason  ;  see  next  verse. 

Ver.  23.  For.  The  reason  for  the  results  stated  in  vers.  21 ,  22, 
contrasting  the  ends  of  the  two  courses  and  the  inherent  difference. — 
The  wages  of  sin,  that  is  paid  by  sin.  Possibly  a  continuation  of 
the  figure  of  military  service. — Death,  as  in  ver.  21. — But  the  free 
gift  of  God;  comp.  chap.  5  :  15-16.  •  Paul  does  not  say  "  wages" 
here  also,  but  characterizes  what  God  gives  for  wages,  as  what  it  is 

in  its  specific  nature, — a  gift  of  grace To  the  Apostle,  in  the 

connection  of  his  system  of  faith  and  doctrine,  this  was  very  natural, 
even  without  the  supposition  of  any  special  design'  (Meyer). — In 
Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.  Not  simply,  'throi^gh'  Him.  The  phrase 
qualifies  the  whole  clause.  In  phrases  like  this  there  seems  to  be 
a  propriety  in  the  order  '  Christ  Jesus.'  emphasizing  His  Messianic 
(or  mediatorial)  title.  'In  Him  by  virtue  of  His  relation  to  Deity, 
God  is  the  giver  :  in  Him,  we,  as  united  with  Him,  having  an  interest 
in  Him,  are  recipients'  (Webster  and  Wilkinson). 

Chapter  7. 

II.  The  Relation  of  Christiaxs  to  the  Law. 

(1.)    We  are  freed  from  it  (vers.  1-6)  ;  for,  (2.)  Although  it  is  Holy 

it  cannot  make  Sinners  Holy  (vers.  7-25). 

1.    Christians  are  freed  from   the   Law,  vers.    1-6. 

This  section  might  more  properly  form  a  part  of  the  preceding  chapter.  The  state- 
ment of  chap.  6:  14,  which  has  been  discussed  negatively  (chap.  6 :  15-23),  is  now 
taken  up  on  its  positive  side  :    Christians  are  not  only  freed  from  sin,  but  freed  from 


102  ROMANS  VII.  [7:2. 

2  over  a  man  for  so  long  time  as  he  liveth  ?     For  the 
woman  that  hath  a  husband  is  bound  by  law  to  the 

the  law.  This  state  of  things  is  here  illustrated  under  the  figure  of  the  marriage 
relation  :  '  your  marriage  with  (  hrist  having  taken  the  place  of  the  dominion  of  the 
law,  necessarily  leads  to  such  a  dominion  of  God  in  a  new  life'  (Tholuck).  The  rela- 
tion to  the  law  (ver.  1)  illustrated  by  the  law  of  marriage  (vers.  2,  3) ;  the  union  with 
Christ  who  died  to  the  law  dissolves  the  old  relation  (ver.  4),  with  this  result  that  as 
in  the  old  relation,  we  brought  forth  fruit  unto  death  (ver.  5),  in  the  new  relation  we 
are  dedicated  to  God  (ver.  6).  This  idea  of  freedom  from  the  law  is  the  basis  of  the 
discussion  in  the  remainder  of  the  chapter. 

Ver.  1.  Or  are  ye  ignorant.  (Comp.  chap.  6:  3.)  In  thus  ap- 
pealing to  experience,  it  is  implied  that  every  believer,  whether 
he  can  explain  it  or  not,  feels  that  he  is  in  the  state  described 
in  chap.  6  :  22,  23,  and  hence  has  some  knowledge  of  bis  freedom 
from  the  law.  This  knowledge  the  Apostle  would  bring  into  clear- 
ness and  power. — Brethren,  etc.  Not  addressed  to  the  Jewish 
Christians  alone  ;  for  in  that  age,  especially,  the  knowledge  of  the  Old 
Testament  on  the  part  of  all  Christians  was  presupposed  ;  the  custom 
of  reading  the  Old  Testament  probably  obtained  in  their  assemblies 
— Knovr  the  lavr.  The  law  of  Moses  is  meant,  although  the  article 
is  wanting  in  the  original ;  for  while  the  argument  might  hold  true 
when  based  upon  law  in  general,  the  subject  under  discussion  is  the 
relation  to  the  Mosaic  law. — The  la"w  hath  dominion,  etc.  The 
whole  law  is  meant,  not  simply  the  law  of  marriage  :  for  that  has  not 
yet  come  into  view. — For  so  long  time,  etc.  This  is  a  peculiarity 
of  the  Mosaic  law,  '  that  it  cannot,  like  human  laws,  have  merely 
temporary  validity,  or  be  altered,  suspended,  nor  can  one  be  exempt 
from  it  for  a  time'  (Meyer^^  But  comp.  the  death  to  the  law 
(ver.  4). 

Ver.  2.  For  the  woman  that  hath  a  husband,  etc.  This  is 
an  example  of  the  principle  of  ver.  1. — Is  bound  by  la"w. — The 
permanent  binding  is  indicated  by  the  form  of  the  original.  The  Mo- 
saic law  made  no  provision  for  her  releasing  herself  from  the  marriage 
tie,  though  the  husband  might  put  away  his  wife  (Deut.  24:  1,  2). — 
If  the  husband  die  ;  a  single  event  is  spoken  of.  The  language  is 
plain,  but  the  application  has  occasioned  difficulty.  In  ver.  1  it  is  not 
the  ruling  law,  but  the  man  who  dies;  here  it  is  the  ruling  man  who 
dies.  Allegorical  explanations  have  been  suggested,  but  seem  forced. 
It  is  better  to  understand  it  thus  :  Death  is  common  to  both  parties ; 
when  the  husband  dies,  the  wife  dies  so  far  as  that  legal  relation  is 
concerned.  The  husband  is  represented  as  the  party  who  dies,  be- 
cause the  figure  of  a  second  marriage  is  to  be  introduced,  with  its  ap- 
plication to  believers  (ver.  4),  'As  the  woman  is  not  dead,  but  is 
killed  in  respect  to  her  marriage  relation,  or  is  situated  as  dead,  by 
the  natural  death  of  her  husband,  so  believers  have  not  died  a  natural 
death,  but  are  made  dead  to  the  law,  since  they  are  crucified  to  the 


7 :  3,  4.]  ROMANS  VII.  103 

husband  while  he  liveth;  but  if  the  husband  die,  she 

3  is  discharg^ed  from  the  law  of  the  husband.  So  then 
if,  while  the  husbaad  liveth,  she  be  joined  to  another 
man,  she  shall  be  called  an  adulteress :  but  if  the  hus- 
band die,  she  is  free  from  the  law,  so  that  she'  is  no 
adulteress,   though   she   be  joined   to   another   man. 

4  AVherefore,  my  brethren,  ye  also  were  made  dead  to 
the  law  through  the  body  of  Christ ;  that  ye  should 
be  joined  to  another,  even  to  him  who  was  raised  from 
ihe  dead,  that  we  might  bring  forth  fruit- unto  God. 

law  with  Christ.  The  idea,  dead  in  a  marriage  relation,  i^  therefore  the 
middle  term  of  comparison.'     (Lange). 

Ver.  3.  So  then.  This  being  the  case  it  follows.  The  verse 
forms  a  parallelism. — Shall  be  called  an  adulteress.  This  is  the 
formal  sentence,  with  a  definite  penalty — stoning  (Lev.  21 :  10 ;  comp. 
John  8  :  5). — Free  from  the  law  ;  free  from  in  so  far  as  it  binds  her 
to  the  husband,  the  binding  effect  of  the  law  as  respects  the  marriage 
relation. — So  that  she  is  no  adulteress.  This  clause  may  express 
either  the  result  ('  so  that' )  or  the  purpose,  '  in  order  that.'  The  lat- 
ter is  perhaps  grammatically  more  exact ;  the  purpose  of  this  freedom 
was  to  prevent  ihe  woman  from  being  an  adulteress  in  case  of  a  second 
marriage.     In  ver.  4  the  idea  of  result  is  evident  enough. 

Ver.  4.  Wherefore  ;  lit.,  ♦  so  that.'  This  introduces  the  applica- 
tion of  the  figure  in  vers.  2,  3. — Ye  also,  as  in  the  case  of  the  widow, 
or,  more  generally,  as  in  all  cases  of  release  from  law  (Weiss). — "Were 
made  dead  to  the  law.  The  idea  is  not  of  being  dead,  but  of  being 
put  to  death,  at  some  single  past  time,  namely,  at  justification.  'The 
expression  is  chosen,  not  merely  because  Christ's  death  was  a  violent 
one,  but  also  because  it  describes  the  death  of  Christians  to  the  lavv 
as  a  death  incurred  by  virtue  of  the  administration  of  the  law'  (Lange) ; 
comp.  Gal.  2  :  19.— Through  the  body  of  Christ.  This  refers  to 
the  death  of  Christ,  either  (1)  as  the  ground  of  justification,  or  (2)  as 
involving  our  fellowship  in  His  death.  The  latter  is  preferable  ;  it 
implies  the  former,  and  suits  the  tenor  of  the  whole  passage. — That, 
i.  e.,  in  order  that,  ye  should  be  joined  to  another,  one  of  a 
different  kind.  The  purpose  of  the  death  to  the  law  was  union  to 
Christ ;  the  figure  of  a  marriage  is  still  present,  and  quite  appropriate. 
'The  exalted  Christ  is  the  husband  of  His  Church  that  has  become  in- 
dependent of  the  law  by  dying  with  Him '  (Meyer). — Was  raised  from 
the  dead.  The  idea  of  a  new  ethical  life  is  constantly  joined  by  the 
Apostle  to  the  fact  of  the  resurrection.  His  own  experience  gave 
emphasis  to  this. — Fruit  unto  God,  i.  e.,  for  His  glory,  since  Christ 
is  the  Husband.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  press  the  figure  of  mar- 
riage at  this  point,  or  in  the  similar  expression  in  ver.  5. 


104  ROMANS  VII.  [7:5,6. 

5  For  when  we  were  in  the  flesh,  the  ^  sinful  passions, 
which  were  through  the  law,  wrought  in  our  members 

6  to  bring  forth  fruit  unto  death.  But  now  we  have 
been  discharged  from  the  law,  having  died  to  that 
wherein  we  were  holden ;  so  that  we  serve  in  newness 
of  the  spirit,  and  not  in  oldness  of  the  letter. 

1  Gr.  passions  of  sins. 

Ver.  5.  For.  A  confirmation  of  the  statement  that  they  should 
bring  forth  fruit  to  God. — When  "we  ■were  in  the  flesh,  i.  e.,  in 
the  natural  condition  of  depravity  (see  Excursus  at  next  section) ;  still 
under  the  law  is  the  negative  side, — The  sinful  passions.  The 
passions  which  led  to  sins,  rather  than  either  *  sinful  passions,'  or  the 
passions  produced  by  sins. — Which  "were  through  the  law  ;  oc- 
casioned by  the  law,  since  the  law  brought  them  to  light,  but  aggra- 
vated them,  as  is  shown  in  vers.  7,  8. — Wrought  in  our  members ; 
to  be  explained  literally  as  in  chap.  6  :  13,  19. — To  bring  forth  fruit 
unto  death.  Parallel  to  the  last  clause  of  ver.  4,  hence  expressing 
the  aim  as  well  as  the  consequence  of  the  working  of  the  passions. 
'  Death'  is  to  be  explained  as  in  chap.  6  :  21, 

Ver.  6.  But  now.  Comp.  chap.  (5 :  22. — We  have  been  dis- 
charged, the  same  word  as  in  ver.  2.  The  annulling  of  the  marriage 
relation  is  referred  to  in  both  cases.  Here  the  exact  reference  is  to 
the  simple  past  act  of  release  or  discharge  from  the  law,  at  the  time  of 
justification. — Having  died  to  that,  etc.  This  is  the  sense  of  the 
reading  now  generally  accepted.  The  figure  of  marriage  is  retained  ; 
we  died  so  far  as  the  law  is  concerned,  hence  the  marriage  tie  is  dis- 
solved (comp,  ver.  2).  'Wherein'  points  to  the  law,  which  'held'  us 
bound  until  we  died  to  it  (comp.  ver.  1).  Weiss,  however,  refers  it 
to  '  the  flesh'  (ver.  ^).— So  that  we  serve  ;  serve  God,  as  the  whole 
passage  shows.  A  present  result,  of  which  the  readers  were  aware,  is 
expressed  in  the  original,  as  the  emendation  of  the  R..  V.  indicates. — 
In  newness  of  the  spirit,  i.  e.,  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  sphere  of  the 
Christian  service  of  God  is  a  new  one,  of  which  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the 
ruling  element  or  force.  Comp.  the  life  in  the  Spirit  as  described  in 
chap.  8.  The  former  service  was  in  oldness  of  the  letter.  This 
is  not  simplj'  ♦  old  letter,'  nor  is  it  exactly  the  same  as  '  in  the  flesh,' 
or,  '  under  the  law.'  The  religious  service,  before  death  to  the  law, 
was  ruled  by  the  letter,  by  the  outward  form  ;  hence  it  had  an  element 
of  decay,  it  was  a  grievous  yoke.  This  does  not  imply  an  antithesis 
between  the  grammatical  sense  of  Scripture  and  some  spiritual  sense, 
but  points  to  the  legal  state,  where  the  attempt  at  obedience  is  prompted, 
not  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  by  the  restraint  of  an  external,  literal  rule. 
The  new  service  is  the  only  true  service ;  under  the  law  such  a  service 
was  not  possible.  The  law  said  :  '  Do  this  and  live  ; '  the  gospel  says : 
*  Live  and  do  this,'  and  the  doing  is  of  a  different  character  from  all 
the  previous  attempts  to  earn  eternal  life. 


7 :  7.]  ROMANS  VII.  105 


Chapter  7  :  7-25. 

The  Law  is  Holy,  but  cannot  make  Sinners  Holy. 

7      What  shall  we  say  then  ?  Is  the  law  sin  ?  God  for- 
bid.    Howbeit,  I  had  not  known  sin,  except  through 

(2.)      The  Law  is  Holy,  but  cannot  make  sinners  Holy,  vers.  7-25. 

The  fact  that  Christians  are  freed  from  the  law  might  suggest  a  wrong  inference  as 
to  the  cliaracter  of  the  law.  This  Paul  denies  (ver.  7),  but  shows  how  the  law,  though 
in  itself  good,  leads  to  acquaintance  with  sin  and  to  destructive  results  (vers.  8-12).  In 
ver.  13  he  suggests  another  (but  similar)  wrong  inference,  and  then  portrays  the  ope- 
ration of  the  law  in  man,  producing  conflict  and  captivity  rather  than  holiness  (vers. 
14-2:i).  In  vers.  24,  25.  the  whole  description  is  summed  up  in  a  cry  of  misery,  fol- 
lowed by  an  outburst  of  gratitude  for  deliverance,  closing  with  the  contrast  between 
the  service  of  mind  and  flesh. 

Introductory  Note.  This  section  has  been  a  theological  battle- 
field for  fifteen  hundred  years  :  the  main  question  being,  to  whom  does 
Paul  refer  when  he  says  '  I,'  whose  history  was  he  describing?  It  is 
generally  agreed  that  the  experience  is  hi?  own,  but  that  it  is  applica- 
ble to  all  men,  in  so  far  as  they  are  striving  to  obey  the  law.  It  is  also 
generally  conceded  that  the  first  part  of  the  description  (vers.  7-13) 
refers  to  Paul  (and  to  men  in  general)  before  regeneration.  The  ques- 
tion which  remains  is  :  To  what  class  does  the  description  of  vers.  14- 
25  apply?  Explanations:  1.  To  the  wnrf^e^erafe  man,  depicting  the 
unsuccessful  strivings  of  his  better  moral  nature.  The  main  difficulty 
with  this  view  is  that  some  of  the  expressions  indicate  a  higher  moral 
purpose  than  is  found  in  unrenewed  man.  2.  To  the  regenerate  man. 
In  favor  of  this  may  be  urged  (a.)  the  change  to  the  present  tense  from 
ver.  14  on;  (b.)  the  common  experience  of  Christians  as  respects  in- 
dwelling sin.  The  objection  is  that  the  whole  passage  up  to  ver.  25  is 
silent  as  to  the  distinctively  Christian  character  of  the  work  of  sanc- 
tification.  Moreover  this  view  would  tend  to  ignore  the  obvious  diflfer- 
ence  between  chaps.  7  and  8.  If  the  experience  is  that  of  a  Christian, 
it  is  that  of  a  Christian  who  is  still  dallying  with  law  as  the  principle 
of  holy  living.  We  therefore  prefer  3.  The  Apostle  does  not  have  in 
mind  any  sharp  distinction  between  the  unregenerate  and  regenerate 
states,  but  gives  the  experience  of  man  attempting  to  become  better 
through  the  law  ;  of  an  awakened  man,  before  he  comes  to  Christ ;  but 
also  of  a  Christian  man  so  far  as  he  feels  the  pressure  of  law  rather 
than  the  power  of  the  Spirit.  Hence  it  is  not  always  possible  to  dis^ 
criminate;  if  the  distinction  between  the  regenerate  and  unregenerate 
states  is  emphasized.  Yet  the  Apostle  himself,  as  a  Jew,  before  his 
conversion,  probably  passed  through  this  entire  experience.  It  was 
his  state,  not  when  sunk  in  sin,  but  when  awakened  to  earnest  strug- 
gles against  sin  under  the  scourge  of  the  law,  under  preparation  for  a 
state  of  grace.     Many  loyal,  despondent  Christians  never  pass  out  of 


106  ROMANS  VII.  [7 ;  8. 

^  the  law :  for  I  had  not  known  ^  coveting,  except  the 

8  law  had  said,  Thou  shalt  not  ^ covet:  but  sin,  finding 

occasion,  wrought  in  me  through  the  commandment 

1  Or,  lust.  2  Or,  lust. 

this  conflict  into  the  more  joyous  life  of  the  Spirit.  They  believe  that 
they  are  justiMed  by  faith  in  Christ,  and  yet  attempt  to  be  sanctified  by 
•jvorks  of  the  law.  But  the  section  not  only  presents  the  common  ex- 
perience of  individuals,  it  also  sketches  the  religious  history  of  the 
race.  Vers.  7-13  correspond  with  the  phenomena  of  heathenism:  the 
natural  man,  at  first  without  revealed  law  and  then  convicted  by  it. 
Vers.  14-25  present  the  phenomena  of  Judaism:  man  under  the  law, 
his  conscience  quickened  thereby,  but  he  himself  still  in  bondage, 
longing  for  a  deliverer.  The  closing  verses  prepare  for  chap.  8,  which 
presents  Christianity  with  its  life  of  freedom  in  the  Spirit.  In  the 
fifth  century  the  passage  was  discussed  by  Augustine,  who  changed  his 
views  in  regard  to  it  after  his  controversy  with  Pelagius.  Many  cen- 
turies later,  in  Holland  the  exegesis  of  the  passage  was  the  pivotal 
point  in  the  conflict  between  the  Calvinists  and  Arminians.  The  ten- 
dency at  present  seems  to  be  in  favor  of  the  position  advanced  under 
(3). 

Ver.  7.  What  shall  we  say  then  ?  Comp.  chap.  3 :  5,  The 
Apostle  proposes  to  consider  the  wrong  inference  which  arises  in  many 
minds,  that  because  the  law  works  as  described  in  vers.  5,  6,  it  is  itself 
wrong. — Is  the  law  sin?  Because,  on  account  of  it,  we  sin,  as 
already  desci'ibed,  is  it  of  an  immoral  nature?  This  the  Apostle  in- 
dignantly denies,  with  the  usual  formula:  God  forbid;  and  then 
proceeds  to  show  how  the  good  law  occasions  these  results  in  us  — 
How^beit  (or,  'nay,  but')  concedes  that  there  is  an  apparent  ground 
for  the  previous  question.  The  law  discovers  sin,  and  in  a  measure 
incites  to  it,  but  it  is  not  itself  sin  nor  the  cause  of  sin  (Alford).  '  I 
say  not  that,  but  what  I  mean  is  that.'  Meyer  and  others  explain : 
'  But  on  the  contrary.' — Known  sin  points  to  both  theoretical  and 
experimental  knowledge  of  sin  ;  the  latter  includes  the  excitement  to 
sin  which  every  human  being  feels,  to  some  extent,  when  confronted 
with  a  positive  precept. — Except  through  the  law.  The  article  is 
wanting,  and  the  principle  applies  in  part  to  law  in  general,  but  the 
next  clause  shows  that  the  Mosaic  law  is  meant. — For  I  had  not 
known.  This  confirms  the  previous  statement ;  the  verb  is  difl'erent 
from  that  which  precedes,  suggesting  a  slighter  knowledge ;  even  this 
is  denied. — Coveting.  This  rendering  presei-ves  the  correspondence 
with  the  similar  vei^b  which  follows.  '  Lust'  (A.  V.)  is  too  specific. — 
Thou  shalt  not  covet.  From  Ex.  20 :  17.  The  objects  of  the  covet- 
ing are  omitted,  for  it  was  the  evil  desire  itself  which  was  made  known 
to  him  by  the  commandment  forbidding  it. 

Ver.  8.  But  sin.  This  approaches  a  personification  of  sin,  as  in 
chap.  5:  12-21.     The  excitement  resulting  from  the  pressure  of  the 


V  ;  8.]  ROMANS^^    V'/]  107 

all  manner  of  ^  coveting :  for  apart  from  ^  the.  law  sin 

9  is  dead.     And  I  was  alive  apart  from  ^  the  law  once  : 

but  when  the  commandment  came,  sin  revived,  and 

1  Or,  lust.  2  Or,  law. 

law  is  now  described.— Finding  occasion.  This  is  properly  sepa- 
rated by  a  comma  from  what  follows  :  '  It  indicates  the  furnishing  the 
material  and  ground  of  attack,  the  icherewith  and  whence  to  attack ' 
(Alford). — Through  the  commandment,  namely,  that  mentioned 
in  ver.  7,  wrought  in  me  all  manner  of  coveting  (as  in  ver.  7). 
'To  man  everytning  forbidden  appears  as  a  desirable  blessing;  but 
yet,  as  it  is  forbidden,  he  feels  that  his  freedom  is  limited,  and  now 
his  lust  rages  more  violently,  like  the  waves  against  the  dyke '  (Tho- 
luck).  Philippi  calls  this,  '  an  immovably  certain  psychological  fact, 
which  man  can  more  easily  reason  away  and  dispute  away,  than  do 
away.'  The  classic  authors  siipport  the  same  principle :  see  the  quo- 
tations given  in  the  footnote,  Lange,  Romans,  pp.  229,  230. — For 
apart  from  the  lavr,  or,  independently  of  the  law,  sin  is  dead. 
Not,  'was,'  the  proposition  is  a  general  one.  '  Dead  '  is  here  used  in  a 
relative,  not  an  absolute,  sense.  Sin  is  relatively  inoperative  until 
excited  into  opposition  by  the  law.  A  reference  to  its  being  unob- 
served, undetected,  is  less  probable.  The  context  shows  tliat  the  Mo- 
saic law  is  meant.  'That  this  may  be  and  is  misused  by  the  principle 
of  sin,  in  the  way  indicated,  arises  from  the  fact,  that  it  comes  for- 
ward merely  with  the  outward  command  (thou  shalt,  thou  shalt  not), 
without  .giving  the  power  of  fulfilment '  (Meyer).  This  is  also  appli- 
cable to  the  law  written  in  men's  hearts,  but  because  sin  is  essentially 
opposition  to  God,  the  revejiled  law  of  God  with  its  sanctions  arouses 
the  greatest  opposition. 

Ver.  9.  And  I  was  alive  apart  from  the  law  once.  '  For ' 
is  incorrect ;  this  clause  continues  the  description  of  the  state  without 
the  law.  'Alive'  has  been  explained  as  meaning:  (1.)  I  seemed  to 
myself  to  live,  because  not  knowing  my  sin.  (2.)  I  lived  securely  as 
a  Pharisee.  (3.)  I  lived  comparatively  innocent.  The  first  is  too 
narrow ;  the  second  is  opposed  by  the  immediate  context  which  does 
not  point  to  conversion  ;  the  last  is  preferable,  if  not  pressed  too  far. 
'Before  an  individual  has  a  distinct  and  vivid  perception  of  the  nature 
and  spirituality  and  extent  of  the  Divine  law,  he  is  less  active  and 
desperate  in  his  sin  and  guilt  than  after  he  comes  to  such  a  know- 
ledge' (Stuart). — But  when  the  commandment  came;  when 
the  specific  precept  came  home  to  me  with  its  prohibition  and  com- 
mand. This  does  not  refer  to  the  experience  immediately  preceding 
conversion,  as  some  of  the  older  expositors  claim. — Sin  revived,  or, 
'sprang  into  life.'  The  former  is  the  more  literal  sense,  but  involves 
a  difficulty  in  regard  to  the  previous  existence  of  sin,  which  it  im- 
plies. We  may,  however,  explain  it  as  referring  to  the  power  of  sin 
which  is  dormant,  though   living,  until   it   is  aroused   into   activity 


108  ROMANS  VII.  [7:  11,1 'A 

I  died  ;  and  the  commandment,  which  was  unto  life, 

11  this  I   found  to  be  unto  death :  for  sin,  finding  occa- 
sion, through   the  commandment  beguiled    me,  and 

12  through  it  slew  me.     So  that  the  law  is  holy,  and  the 

through  the  commandment. — And  I  died.  Just  as  sin  became  alive, 
he  died;  he  through  the  knowledge  and  excitement  of  sin,  entered 
into  a  moral  state,  which  he  calls  death.  This  is  further  explained  in 
what  follows. 

Ver.  10.  Which  was  unto  life.  The  promise  of  the  law,  cover- 
ing its  every  'commandment,'  was  'do  this  and  live;'  its  aim  was 
«life.' — This.  A  change  of  accent  would  call  for  the  rendering  '  the 
same;'  but  'this'  is  now  generally  accepted.  It  gives  a  tragical  force 
to  the  expression:  'this  very  commandment.' — I  found  (lit.,  'was 
found  by  me')  to  be  unto  death.  The  aim  was  'life;'  as  a  matter 
of  personal  human  experience  the  result  was  '  death.'  The  present 
misery  resulting  from  the  excitement  and  knowledge  of  sin  seems  to  be 
referred  to,  for  this  only  could  be  'found'  to  be  the  result,  as  a  matter 
of  expeiience. 

Ver.  11.  For  sin,  etc.  In  ver.  8,  which  resembles  this,  Paiil  ex- 
plains the  excitement  of  evil  desire  through  the  law;  namely,  how  sin 
revived,  but  here  he  explains  the  other  phrase:  'I  died.'  The  word 
'sin'  is  herein  more  emphatic  than  in  ver.  8.  It  was  not  in  the  'law,' 
but  '  sin '  that  wrought  this  sad  result.— Through  the  command- 
ment beguiled  me.  These  words  are  to  be  joined  together,  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  analogy  of  ver.  8,  and  of  the  following  clause.  '  It 
first  made  the  commandment  a  provocation,  and  then  a  means  of  con- 
demnation. Thus  what  applies  to  Satan,  that  he  was  first  man's 
tempter,  and  then  his  accuser,  applies  likewise  to  sin.  This  passage 
calls  to  mind  the  serpent  in  paradise,  as  in  2  Cor.  11:3'  (Lange).  To 
refer  this  to  the  conviction  of  sin  wliich  precedes  conversion  seems 
unnecessary. — And  through  it  slew  me.  It  thus  led  to  a  con- 
sciousness of  the  state  of  sin  and  misery  referred  to  in  ver.  10  :  '  I 
died.'  The  experience  here  portrayed  has  been  reproduced  in  every 
age  :  this  is  the  universal  effect  of  God' s  law  upon  sinful  man  whose 
conscience  is  not  yet  dead. 

Ver.  12.  So  that.  The  result  of  the  whole  discussion  (vers.  7-11) 
is  not  to  cast  doubt  upon  the  law,  but  to  maintain  its  character  as 
worthy  of  God  who  gave  it.  The  original  suggests  a  second  member 
of  the  sentence,  which  is  indicated  in  ver.  13. — The  law  is  holy. 
This  positive  character  of  the  law  Paul  does  not  stop  to  prove  ;  for  the 
only  suspicion  against  its  holy  character  came  from  the  sinful  results 
already  spoken  of.  But  there  the  law  was  constantly  condemning, 
which  condemnation  betokened  that  it  was  'holy.' — And  the  com- 
mandment. What  is  true  of  the  law  as  a  whole,  is  also  true  of  its 
single  commandments. — Holy,  and  righteous,  and  good.  '  Holy,' 
because  it  comes  from  a  holy  God  :   '  righteous,'  because  of  its  form  ; 


7 :  13, 14.]  ROMANS  VII.  109 

13  commandment  lioly,  and  righteous,  and  good.  Did 
then  that  which  is  good  become  death  unto  me  ?  God 
forbid.  But  sin,  that  it  might  be  shewn  to  be  sin,  by 
working  death  to  me  through  that  which  is  good  ; — 
that  through  the  commandment  sin  might  become  ex- 

14  ceeding  sinful.   For  we  know  that  the  law  is  spiritual : 

'  good,'  because  of  its  end  (so  Bengel).  As  the  specific  commandment 
had  in  each  case  been  used  by  sin  to  deceive  and  slay  him,  the  Apostle 
gives  this  full  dcclai-ation  of  the  character  of  '  the  commandment.' 

Ver.  13.  Did  then  that  which  is  good,  i.  e.,  did  the  command- 
ment itself,  which  was  '  good,'  designed  for  beneficial  results,  become 
death  unto  me.  This  the  Apostle  denies  :  The  law  itself  was  neither 
sin  (ver.  7)  nor  the  cause  of  death. — But  sin  ;  sin  became  death  unto 
me.— That  it  might  be  shewn  to  be  sin.  This  was  the  design, 
namely,  that  it  might  be  shown  to  be  what  it  really  is  :  compare  the 
last  clause.— "Working  death  to  me  through  that  which  is 
good.  This  was  the  mode  in  which  sin  was  made  to  appear  sin :  by 
m  iking  use  of  what  is  good  to  produce  death  in  men,  it  reveals  more 
fully  its  own  hideous  character.  '  As  it  is  the  sovereigu  right  of  good 
to  overrule  evil  results  for  good,  so  it  is  the  curse  of  sin  to  pervert  the 
efjcts  of  what  is  good  to  evil '  (from  Lange).  —That,  etc.  This  clause 
is  parallel  to  the  preceding  one,  expressing  again  the  purpose. — 
Through  the  commandment,  i.  e.,  '  that  which  is  good.' — Ex- 
ceeding sinful.  '  Such  is  the  design  of  the  law,  so  far  as  the  salva- 
tion of  sinners  is  concerned.  It  does  not  prescribe  the  conditions  of 
salvation.'  Neither  is  the  law  the  means  of  sanctification.  It  cannot 
make  us  holy.  On  the  contrary,  its  operation  is  to  excite  and  exas- 
perate sin  —  to  render  its  power  more  dreadful  and  destructive' 
(Hodge).  Because  this  is  so  true,  it  seems  unlikely  that  what  immedi- 
ately follows  is  the  distinctive  experience  of  a  Christian. 

Ver.  14.  For  we  kno"w.  This  is  again  an  appeal  to  Christian 
experience,  but  we  cannot  infer  from  this  that  the  experience  of  the 
'  I '  is  distinctively  Christian.  This  verse  is  a  proof  of  ver.  13. — The 
law  is  spiritual ;  in  its  essence  it  is  divine,  because  its  charactei'is- 
tics  are  those  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  This  view  agrees  best  with  the  con- 
trast which  follows.  Other  views :  inspired  by  the  Huly  Spirit ; 
related  to  the  spiritual  nature  of  man ;  fulfilled  by  those  only  who 
have  the  Holy  Spirit ;  requiring  an  angelic  righteousness,  etc.  Most 
of  these  are  true,  but  not  in  accordance  with  the  Scripture  use  of  the 
word  'spiritual,'  or  with  the  context. — But  I  am  carnal.  The 
change  of  a  sinq;le  letter  gives,  as  the  better  reading,  the  word  mean- 
ing, '  made  of  flesh,'  instead  that  meaning,  '  of  a  fleshly  character.' 
The  correct  reading  seems  to  give  the  stronger  sense,  though  this  is 
denied  by  some,  in  order  to  defend  the  reference  to  the  regenerate 
man.  We  think  Paul  here  describes  himself  not  as  a  Christian,  but 
over  against  the  law.     For  he  does  not  use  the  word  *  spirit'  at  all  in 


110  ROMANS  VII.  [7:15,16. 

but  I  am  carnal,  sold  under  sin.     For  that  which  I 

15  ^do  I  know  not:  for  not  what  I  would,  that  do  I 

16  practice ;  but  what  I  hate,  that  I  do.  •  But  if  what  I 
would  not,  that  1  do,  I  consent  unto  the  law  that  it  is 

1  Gr.  ivorlc. 

this  description,  and  applies  '  spiritual '  only  to  the  law  ;  wherea.s  in  » 
the  Christian  the  conflict  is  directly  between  'flesh'  and  'Spirit'  (on 
these  terms,  see  Excursus  below).  '  It  is  true  the  situation,  which  the 
Apostle  thus  exhibits  in  his  own  representative  Ego,  was  for  himself 
as  an  individual  one  long  since  past ;  but  he  realizes  it  as  present  and 
places  it  before  the  eyes  like  a  picture,  in  which  the  standpoint  of  the 
happier  present  in  which  he  now  finds  himself  renders  possible  the 
perspective  that  lends  to  every  feature  of  his  portrait  the  light  of  clear- 
ness and  truth  '  (Meyer).— Sold  under  sin.  A  permanent  state  of 
slavery  is  referred  to  ;  sin  being  personified  as  the  master.  How  this 
state  of  slavery  manifests  itself  is  described  in  the  next  verse. 

Ver.  15.  For  that  which  I  do  (or.  'work').  In  this  passage 
there  arc  three  Greek  words  translated  '  do  '  in  the  A.  V.  We  may 
distinguish  them  thus :  work,  practice,  do. — I  know  not.  This 
does  not  mean:  'I  do  not  approve,'  but  that  like  a  slave  he  per- 
forms ignorantly  the  will  of  his  master.  But  Lange  rightly  says  : 
'  thus  one  thing  dawns  upon  him — that  he  acts  in  gloomy  self-distrac- 
tion, and  in  contradiction  of  a  better  but  helpless  desire  and  repug- 
nance.' (So  Weiss.)  The  rest  of  the  verse  indicates  this  :  For  not 
what  I  would,  that  do  I  practice  ;  but  what  I  hate,  that  I 
do.  The  main  question  here  is  respecting  these  two  contrasted  verbs, 
'  would  '  and  '  hate  '  Some  strengthen  the  former  into  '  love,'  in  the 
interest  of  an  exclusive  reference  to  the  regenerate  ;  others  weaken 
the  latter  int«o  '  do  not  wish.'  We  prefer  to  regard  '  hate  '  as  stronger 
than  '  would,'  while  '  practise '  is  stronger  than  '  do.'  This  suggests 
that  the  desire  for  good  is  less  strong  than  the  hatred  of  evil.  Pas- 
sages from  heathen  writers  express  similar  sentiments.  It  is  asserted 
that  no  such  '  will '  exists  in  the  unregenerate  man,  but  this  is  true 
only  wlien  the  sense  of  'will'  is  unduly  pressed.  To  admit  that  an 
unregenerate  man  can  use  the  language  of  this  verse,  is  perfectly  con- 
sistent with  a  belief  in  the  depravity  of  the  human  will. 

Ver.  16.  But  if.  This  verse  is  a  logical  inference  from  the  position 
of  ver.  15.  It  is,  however,  the  logic  of  a  Christian  applied  to  the  con- 
dition under  the  law,  or  it  may  mark  an  advanced  step  in  the  recog- 
nition of  the  true  position  towards  the  law. — What  I  "would  not, 
that  I  do.  Compare  the  similar  clause  in  ver.  15.  Here  the  weaker 
phrase  '  would  not'  is  sub'-tituted  for  '  hate.'  Even  this  negative  ^tti^ 
tude  proves  the  character  of  the  law.— I  consent  unto  the  law 
that  it  is  good.  This  marks  an  acquiescence  in  the  high  moral 
character  of  the  law.  This  acquiescence  is  more  than  intellectual,  or 
no  conviction  of  sin  would  result.     Some  conviction  of  sia  is  implied, 


7 :  17,  18.]  ROMANS  VII.  Ill 

17  good.     So  now  it  is  no  more  I  that  Vlo  it,  but   sin 

18  which  dwelleth  in  me.  For  I  know  that  in  me,  tliat  is, 
in  my  flesh,  dwelleth  no  good  thing:  for  to  will  is  pre- 
sent Avith  me,  but  to  Mo  that  which  is  good  is  not. 

1  Gr.  work. 

and  must  exist  in  every  man  awakened  by  the  claims  of  the  law. 
♦  My  conduct,  therefore,  so  far  as  my  desire  is  opposed  to  it,  appears 
according  to  this  contradiction,  as  a  proof  that  I  concur  with  tlie  law 
that  it  is  beautiful,  ^.  e.,  morally  good  ;  the  moral  excellence  which 
the  law  affirms  of  itself  (e.  g.,  Deut.  4:  8)  I  also  agree  with  it  in  ac- 
knowledging ;   in  point  of  fact,  I  say  yes  to  it'  (Meyer). 

Ver.  17.  So  now,  as  the  case  stands. — It  is  no  more  I  that  do 
('  work')  it,  i.  e.,  '  what  I  would  not.'  I  am  a  slave  under  sin,  what 
'I  work,  I  know  not'  (ver.  16).  Both  'now'  and  'no  more'  are 
logical,  but  temporal ;  they  point  to  an  inference,  not  necessarily  to  a 
transition  from  a  former  condition  into  a  state  of  grace.  '  I '  refers  to 
the  'moral  self-consciousness,'  but  there  is  as  yet  no  indication  that 
this  state  of  things  of  itself  does  or  can  lead  to  anything  better.  The 
desire  is  powerless  ;  the  '  I '  is  enslaved. —  But  sin  w^hich  d^well- 
eth  in  me  ;  the  master  to  whom  I  am  enslaved.  'In  me '  is  sup- 
posed by  many  to  differ  from  '  I,'  since  ver.  18  explains  the  former  as 
'in  my  flesh.'  The  two  phrases  are  a  verbal  reproduction  of  the 
apparent  duality  in  the  person  who  is  passing  through  such  a  moral 
conflict.  There  is  no  sign  of  release,  no  assertion  of  power  to  do 
good  of  which  the  '  I '  approves.  Whether  the  experience  be  that  of 
a  regenerate  or  unregenerate  man,  the  moral  responsibility  rests  on 
him  in  whom  sin  dwells  ;  the  description  is  intended  to  prove  the 
powerlessness  of  man  under  the  law,  not  to  define  his  responsibility. 

Ver.  18.  For  I  knoTV  ;  not,  'we  know,'  which  would  point  to 
common  Christian  experience.  This  verse  proves  from  the  experience 
of  the  man  whose  case  is  described,  the  truth  of  ver.  17. — In  me, 
that  is,  in  my  flesh,  in  my  depraved  human  nature  ;  '  flesh '  being 
here  used  in  its  strict  ethical  sense.  Usually  io  thig  sense  the  anti- 
thesis is  '  Spirit,'  and  even  here  that  idea  is  implied  in  the  spirituality 
of  the  law  which  produces  the  experience  under  discussion.  Hence 
it  is  not  necessary  to  assume  that  the  case  is  that  of  a  regenerate  man, 
in  order  to  find  room  for  a  reference  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  over  against 
the  '  flesh.'  The  man  under  the  law,  whether  before  or  after  con- 
version, is  here  represented  as  becoming  conscious  that  he  is  '  made 
of  flesh,'  under  the  conflict  awakened  by  the  law.  The  better  desire 
may  exist  (see  next  clause),  but  in  every  case  it  is  powerless  unless 
the  man  escapes  from  the  law  to  Christ. — For  to  "will  is  present 
•with  me,  lies  before  me.  'Will'  here  is  the  same  as  'would'  (vers. 
15,  16,  19-21),  and  preserves  the  same  general  sense,  of  wishing, 
being  willing,  rather  than  of  a  decisive  purpose  or  controlling  desire. 
— But  to  do  ('work  )  that  which  is  good  is  not.     The  better 


112  ROMANS  VII.  [7:  19-21. 

19  For  the  good  which  I  would  I  do  not :  but  the  evil 

20  which  I  would  not,  that  I  practise.     But  if  what  I 
would  not,  that  I  do,  it  is  no  more  I  that  Mo  it,  but 

21  sin  which  dwelleth  in  me.    I  find  then  ^the  law,  that, 

1  Gr.  worh.  -  Or,  in  regard  of  the  laxc. 

sustained  reading  is  followed.  Wishing  lias  before  me,  but  executing 
does  not ;  I  can  and  do  have  a  desire  for  what  is  good,  but  I  cannot 
and  do  not  carry  that  desire  into  effect :  this  experience  proves  that 
there  dwells  in  me,  that  is,  in  my  flesh,  no  good  thing.  So  far  as  one 
is  'in  the  flesh,'  this  is  his  highest  moral  state;  only  when  'in  the 
Spirit'  can  good  be  truly  performed. 

Ver.  19.  For  the  good,  etc.  This  verse  is  a  proof  of  the  last 
clause  of  ver.  18;  and  ver.  20,  wiiich  is  an  inference  from  this  verse, 
leads  back  to  the  statement  of  ver.  17. — But  the  evil  -which  I 
vrould  not,  that  I  practise.  This  is  the  strongest  expression  of 
sinfulness  yet  made.  Paul,  looking  back  from  his  Christian  point  of 
view,  no  doubt  includes  more  than  heathen  writers  have  done  when 
using  similar  expressions ;  but  what  he  says  is  to  a  certain  extent  the 
experience  of  every  man  whose  conscience  is  affected  by  the  law. 

Ver.  20.  But  if  -what  I  -would  not,  etc.  Since  this  is  the  case 
(as  ver.  19  shows),  then  the  position  of  ver.  17  is  sustained:  it  is  no 
more  I,  etc.  The  repetition  in  this  clause  is  exact,  but  in  the  phrase 
'  I  would,'  some  emphasis  rests  on  '  I.'  This  is  taken  by  many  as  indi- 
cating a  progress  in  thought.  But  there  is  no  sign  as  yet  of  a  more 
hopeful  condition.  The  progress  is  still  toward  wretchedness,  despite, 
or  perhaps  because  of,  this  increased  desire. 

Ver.  21.  I  find  then  the  la-w,  etc.  The  literal  sense  of  the 
verse  is:  I  find  then  the  law  to  me  wishing  (willing)  to  do  the  good, 
that  to  me  the  evil  is  present.  Some  refer  'the  law'  to  the  Mosaic 
law,  because  that  has  been  in  mind  up  to  this  point.  But  it  is  very 
diflicult  to  explain  the  verse  on  this  theory.  Moreover,  in  what  im- 
mediately follows  (vers.  22,  23),  'law'  is  used  in  a  wider  sense,  and 
'the  law  of  God'  is  specified,  as  if  the  term  here  us^d  had  another 
reference.  We  prefer,  therefore,  the  usual  view:  'I  find  then  (as  the 
summing  of  my  experience,  vers.  14—20)  the  law  (of  moral  contradic- 
tion) when  I  wish  to  do  good,  that  evil  is  present  with  me.'  Vers. 
22,  23,  then  introduce  the  opposing  laws  which  make  the  contradic- 
tion. (Meyer  thus  explains  the  verse:  'I  find,  then,  while  my  will 
is  directed  to  the  law  in  order  to  do  good,  that  evil  is  present  with 
me.'     Another  view  is  given  in  the  R.  V.  marg.) 

Vers.  22,  23.  We  liave  four  phrases  contrasted  in  pairs:  'The  law 
of  God;'  'another  law  in  m.y  members,'  etc.;  'the  law  of  my  mind;' 
'the  law  of  sin  and  death,'  etc.  Each  phrase  has  its  distinct  meaning, 
while  those  forming  pairs  are  closely  related :  The  law  of  God  is  the 
Mosaic  law,  but  the  law  of  the  mind  is  the  same  law  so  far  as  it  is 
operative  in  the  mind  ;  the  law  in  the  members  is  the  law  of  sin,  so 


7 :  22,  23.]  ROMANS  VII.  113 

22  to  me  who  would  do  good,  evil  is  present.     For  I 
delight  ^in  the  law  of  God  after  the  inward  man: 

23  but  I  see  a  different  law  in   my  members,  warring 
against  the  law  of  my  mind,  and  bringing  me  unto 

1  Gr.  ivith. 

far  as  it  i?  operative  in  the  members ;  the  extreme  contrast  is  between 
the  law  of  God  and  the  law  of  sin  and  death.  '  The  law'  of  ver.  21  is 
this  principle  of  moral  conflict  which  the  Apostle  found  in  his  expe- 
rience. 

Ver.  22.  For  I  delight  in  the  law  of  God.  '  For'  introduces 
an  explanation  of  ver.  21.  'Delight  in'  is  stronger  than  'consent 
unto'  (ver.  16),  but  must  not  be  pressed  too  far,  since  ver.  21,  of 
which  this  is  an  explanation,  is  a  summing  up  of  the  experience  in 
vers.  14-20.  Meyer  explains:  '  I  rejoice  with  the  law  of  God,  so  that 
its  joy  (the  law  being  personified)  is  also  mine'  (see  R.  V,  marg.). 
But  this  is  not  necessary,  and  too  strong. — After  the  invrard  man. 
Those  who  refer  the  experience  to  the  regenerate  man  consider  this 
phrase  as  identical  with  'the  new  man,'  under  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  But  why  is  the  influence  of  the  Spirit  so  carefully  kept 
out  of  view?  Some  say :  Because  Paul  would  set  the  conflict  in  the 
strongest  light.  But  it  is  unlike  him  to  keep  Christ  and  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  back-ground.  AVe  prefer,  then,  to  distinguish  between 
♦  the  inward  man '  and  the  'new  man.'  The  former  is  the  internal 
sphere  of  spiritual  influence  where  the  law  operates :  in  the  regenerate 
man  this  has  become  the  new  man,  but  before  renewal  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  the  inner  man,  despite  all  its  agreement  with  the  law,  even 
when  in  aroused  feeling  it  might  be  said  to  delight  in  the  law  of  God, 
is  in  a  helpless  condition,  all  the  more  miserable,  because  of  its  appro- 
val of  the  law.  When  the  Christian  is  '  under  the  law,'  his  delight 
may  be  more  pronounced,  but  so  long  as  he  seeks  sanctification 
through  the  law,  he  is  quite  as  helpless.  'The  inward  man'  here  is 
nearly  equivalent  to  'mind'  in  vers.  23,  25;  and  also  to  'spirit,'  so 
far  as  that  term  exclusively  applies  to  the  highest  part  of  man's  na- 
ture, irrespective  of  the  inworking  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  (See  Excursus 
below.) 

Ver.  23.  But  I  see  a  different  law.  Not  simply  '  another,'  but 
a  *  different,'  one  ;  comp.  Gal.  1:6,  7.  Paul  represents  himself  as 
witnessing  the  conflict  within  his  own  person. — In  my  members. 
To  be  joined  with  'law,'  rather  than  with  'warring'  (Fritzsche),  or 
with  'see'  (Weiss).  This  does  not  mean  'in  my  flesh,'  i.  e.,  carnal 
nature,  over  against  my  renewed  nature,  but  points  to  the  members  of 
the  body,  as  the  locality  where  the  working  of  the  opposing  law  is 
most  evident.  It  is  not  implied  that  these  members  are  the  sole  seat  of 
sin.  This  is  unpauline,  whether  applied  to  the  regenerate  or  to  the 
unregenerate. — "Warring  against  the  law^  of  my  mind.  The  con- 
flict is  against  the  law  of  God,  not  as  such,  but  as  operating  in,  or  be- 
8 


114  ROMANS  VII.  [7:24. 

captivity  ^  under  the  law  of  sin  which  is  in  my  mem- 
24  bers.     O  wretched  man  that  I  am  !  who  shall  deliver 

1  Gr.  ill.  Many  ancient  authorities  read  to. 

longing  to,  the  '  mind.'  This  term  refers  to  the  higher  part  of  man's 
nature,  or  spirit.  Meyer  explains  it  as  'the  reason  in  its  practical  ac- 
tivity,' but  see  ver.  22,  and  Excursus  below.  It  does  not  mean  the 
unfallen  human  spirit,  there  being  no  trace  of  such  a  notion  in  the 
New  Testament.  Nor  on  the  other  hand  is  '  mind  '  here  equivalent  to 
renewed  nature.  In  that  case  we  would  find  some  hint  of  the  Holy 
Spirit's  influence.  So  far  as  a  man  is  living  under  the  law,  the  best 
that  his  '  mind '  (;an  do  is  to  present  a  powerless  opposition  to  the  law 
in  the  members. — Bringing  me  into  captivity,  '  taking  me  pris- 
oner,' under  the  law  of  sin.  '  In'  is  the  literal  sense  of  the  better 
established  reading.  The  law  in  the  members  is  the  warrior  that  takes 
the  captive,  the  law  of  sin  is  the  victor  under  whom  the  captive  is 
held ;  the  two  laws  are  practically  identical.  A  wretched  condition 
(ver.  24),  but  some  recognition  of  it  is  a  necessary  preliminary  to  de- 
liverance. 

Ver.  24,  O  -wretched  man  that  I  am !  Some  would  inclose 
this  verse,  and  the  first  clause  of  ver.  25  in  parenthesis  ;  but  this  is 
unnecessary.  The  w^ord  '  wretched  '  implies  '  exhausted  by  hard 
labor;'  comp.  Matt.  11:  18.  The  prominent  ideas  are  of  helplessness 
and  wretchedness ;  the  cry  for  the  deliverance  follows.  A  believer 
may  thus  speak,  doubtless  aflen  does  ;  but  this  condition  is  precisely 
that  from  which  we  are  delivered. — Who  shall  deliver  me.  Not 
merely  a  wish  :  would  that  I  were  delivered,  but  rather:  who  will 
deliver  me,  who  can  do  it ;  not  without  a  reference  to  help  from  a 
person.  Those  who  apply  the  passage  to  the  regenerate  must  assume 
here  a  temporary  absence  of  relief.  It  does  apply  to  the  regenerate 
man,  when  by  seeking  sanctification  by  the  law  he  forgets  Christ,  and 
deprives  himself  of  the  help  of  the  Spirit.  — Out  of  the  body  of 
this  death,  or,  'this  body  of  death?'  The  interpretations  are  quite 
various:  1.  This  body  of  death;  (a)  this  mortal  body.  But  this 
makes  the  body  the  seat  of  sin,  or  amounts  to  a  desire  for  death  ;  both 
of  which  are  unpauline  and  contrary  to  the  context.  (6)  Still  less 
satisfactory  is  the  view  that  personifies  death  as  a  monster  with  a 
body.  2.  '  The  body  of  this  death.'  This  is  preferable,  since  the  em- 
phasis in  the  original  seems  to  rest  upon  '  this  death.'  There  is,  how- 
ever, no  reference  to  physical  death,  but  to  the  whole  condition  of 
helplessness,  guilt,  and  misery  just  described,  which  is,  in  effect, 
spiritual  death.  But  '  body  '  may  be  taken  either:  (o)  literally,  or  (b) 
figuratively.  The  literal  sense  suggests  that  the  body  is  the  seat  of 
sin,  and  may  be  made  equivalent  to  a  desire  for  death.  Meyer  guards 
it  thus :  '  Who  shall  deliver  me  out  of  bondage  under  the  law  of  sin 
into  moral  freedom,  in  which  my  body  shall  no  longer  serve  as  the 
seat  of  this  shameful  death.'  This  agrees  with  the  reference  to  'mem- 
bers '  in  ver.  23.     But  the  figurative  sense  has  more  to  recommend  it. 


7:  25.]  ROMANS  VII.  115 

25  me  out  of  ^  the  body  of  this  death  ?     ^I  thank  God 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.     So  then  I  myself 

1  Or,  this  body  of  death.  2  Many  ancient  authorities  read  But  thanks  be  to  God. 

'Body'  is  the  organism  of  *  this  death  ;'  it  cliugs  to  me  as  closely  as 
the  body.  We  thus  avoid  on  the  one  hand  making  this  a  desire  for 
death,  and  on  the  other  giving  to  'body'  that  ethical  sense  which  is 
peculiar  to  '  flesh.'  The  ethical  idea  is  this  in  '  death  '  not  in  '  body.' 
A  turning  point  is  now  reached.  It  is  probable  that  even  this  cry  is 
uttered  'in  full  consciousness  of  the  deliverance  which  Christ  has  ef- 
fected, and  as  leading  to  the  expression  of  thanks  which  follows' 
(Alford,  following  De  Wette). 

Ver.  25.  I  thank  God,  or,  '  thanks  be  to  God;' it  being  difficult  to 
decide  between  the  two.  (Some  authorities  read :  but  thanks  be  to  God.) 
This  thanksgiving  is  for  deliverance:  it  is  a  deliverance  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  Not  simp  y  that  the  thanksgiving  is 
through  Him,  but  the  fact  that  the  thanks  to  God  are  due  to  Jesus 
Christ.  Here  is  the  key-note  of  a  life  distinctively  Christian  over 
against  the  attempt  to  live  better  under  the  law. — So  then.  This 
sums  up  the  whole:  since  this  is  the  conflict  and  a  hopeless  one  until 
Christ  delivers.  Others  would  connect  this  with  ver.  24. — I  myself, 
etc.  The  two  leading  interpretations  are  :  (1.)  'I  myself  as  the  same 
man,'  live  this  divided  life  ;  (2.)  '  I  of  myself,'  apart  from  Christ,  thus 
live.  (See  tbe  rendering  of  the  Am.  Com.)  If  (1)  be  adopted,  and 
applied  to  the  man  who  has  uttered  the  thanksgiving,  the  inference 
would  be  that  such  discord  was  the  normal  condition  of  the  Christian. 
To  apply  it  to  the  unregenerate  man  seems  objectionable,  for  how  can 
such  an  one  be  said  to  serve  the  law  of  God.  On  the  whole,  then,  (2.) 
is  more  satisfactory.  '  I  in  myself,  notwithstanding  whatever  progress 
in  righteousness  the  Spirit  of  Christ  may  have  brought  in  me,  or  will 
work  in  this  life,  am  still  most  imperfect;  with  my  mind,  indeed,  I 
serve  the  law  of  God,  but  with  my  flesb  the  law  of  sin  ;  and,  tried  by 
the  law,  could  not  be  justified,  but  would  come  under  condemnation, 
if  viewed  in  myself,  and  not  in  Christ  Jesus'  (Forbes).  This  suggests 
the  connection  with  chap.  8.  To  make  an  alternative  :  either  with  the 
mind,  etc.,  or  with  the  flesh,  is  not  grammatical.— "With  the  mind, 
or,  'with  my  mind,  indeed.  Not  'with  the  Spirit,'  for  it  is  the  man 
of  the  law  Avho  is  still  spoken  of,  even  though  he  has  been  delivered 
and  looks  back  upon  the  worst  of  the  conflict. — With  the  flesh  the 
laTW  of  sin.  The  service  of  the  law,  whose  excellence  is  recognized 
hy  the  mind,  is  attempted,  but  the  flesh  interferes;  as  the  ruling  power 
it  brings  into  captivity  m  every  case  where  the  mere  service  of  law.  even 
of  the  law  of  God,  is  the  aim.  That  the  Christian  is  not  ruled  by  the 
flesh  is  his  distinctive  privilege,  but  obedience  from  legalistic  motives 
gives  the  flesh  fresh  power.  Hence  we  find  here,  even  after  the  thanks- 
giving, a  quasi-conf«ssion  of  defeat,  to  connect  with  the  next  chapter. 

The  whole  passage  seems,  by  its  alternations,  its  choice  of  words,  as 
well  as  its  position  in  the  Epistle,  to  point  to  an  experience  which  is 


116  ROMANS  VII.  [7:  25. 

with  the  mind  serve  *  the  law  of  God ;  but  With  the 
flesh  the  law  of  sin. 

*For  I  myself  with  the  mind  serve  read  I  of  myself  with  the  mind,  indeed,  serve.-^AJii. 
Com. 

produced  by  the  lioly,  just,  and  good  law  of  God,  rather  than  the  gospel 
of  Jesus  Christ ;  so  that  even  the  out-burst  of  Christian  gratitude  is 
followed  by  a  final  recurrence  to  the  conflict,  which  is,  indeed,  ever- 
recurring,  so  long  as  we  seek  holiness  through  the  law  rather  than 
through  Christ. 

Excursus  on  some  Psychological  Terms  of  the  New  Testament. 

1.  Body.  This  generally  refers  to  the  physical  body,  though  it  often  suggests  the 
organism  of  the  body.  A  living  body  is  usually  meant.  Figuratively  it  is  applied  to 
the  Church.  In  a  few  passages  where  it  seems  to  imply  sinfulness,  it  may  be  inter- 
preted in  a  figurative  sense,  as  referring  to  the  organism  of  sin  (Rom.  6:6;  7 :  2'4 ;  Col. 
2 :  11),  or  literally  to  the  body  as  far  as  it  has  become  the  organ  of  sin.  The  thought 
that  the  body  is  the  source  of  sin,  or  even  its  chief  seat,  is  unwarranted  alike  by  Scrip- 
ture and  by  experience. 

2.  Soul.  The  word  we  translate  soul  often  means  '  life,'  animal  life  ;  the  word  which 
represents  eternal  life,  life  in  the  highest  sense,  is  a  different  one.  '  Soul '  may  mean 
the  whole  immaterial  part  of  man,  or  it  may  be  distinguished  from  '  spirit.'  But  the 
distinction  is  difiBcult  to  define,  see  under  3.  It  does  not  mean  the  fallen  part  of  our 
immaterial  nature  over  against  an  unfallen  part  called  '  spirit,'  nor  is  it  to  be  limited 
to  the  animal  life.  The  Old  Testament  usage  seems  decisive  on  both  points.  It  is 
unfortunate  that  the  influence  of  Hebi-ew  modes  of  thought  has  not  been  sufficiently 
recognized  in  the  discussions  about  this  and  kindred  terms.  Furthermore  the  analytic 
tendency  of  many  modern  systems  has  led  to  the  acceptance  of  a  division  where  the 
Scriptures  suggest  only  a  distinction. 

3.  Spirit.  This  term,  the  Hebrew  equivalent  of  which  is  very  common  in  the  Old 
Testament,  has  in  the  New  Testament  a  number  of  meanings.  It  is  derived  from  the 
word  meaning  '  to  blow,'  and  retains  in  rare  instances  (John  i :  8 ;  Keb.  1 :  7)  its  early 
sense  of  ivind.  We  often  use  it  now  as  equivalent  to  temper,  disposition;  but  in  the 
New  Testament  it  rarely,  if  ever,  refers  to  this  alone.  It  is,  however,  applied  to  evil 
(unclean,)  spirits,  and  to  good  angels.  In  these  cases  it  refers  to  a  mode  of  being,  irre- 
spective of  the  moral  quality,  which  is  defined  by  the  context. 

Aside  from  these  incidental  meanings,  the  word  is  used  in  the  New  Testament  in 
three  senses : — 

(a.)  The  theological  sense,  referring  to  the  Holy  Spirit. 

{b  )  The  anthropological  sense,  referring  to  the  sp'rit  of  man,  as  part  of  his  nature. 

(c.)  The  soteriological  sense,  referring  to  the  indwelling  Holy  Spirit,  or,  to  the  spirit 
of  man  as  informed  by  the  indwelling  Holy  Spirit. 

(a.)  The  prevailing  sense  in  the  New  Testament  is  the  theological  one,  that  is,  it 
means  the  Spirit  of  God,  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  the  contrast  with  'flesh'  (see  below)  it 
usually  has  this  sense,  but  frequently  in  the  modified  form  which  is  discussed  under  (c  ). 

(b.)  The  anthropological  sense  is  not  very  common.  It  must  be  insisted  upon,  rather 
for  the  purpose  "of  defining  the  other  senses  and  kindred  terms,  than  for  its  own  sake. 
In  I  Thess.  5 :  23,  we  find  a  reference  to  '  body,  soul  and  spirit,'  but  even  here  Christians 


7;  25.]  ROMANS  VII.  117 

are  spoken  of.  At  the  same  time  we  infer  from  this  passage,  from  the  Old  Testament 
distinctions,  and  from  Heb.  4 :  12, '  that  in  the  original  structure  of  man  there  is  some- 
thing— yet  remaining,  needing,  and  capable  of  sunctification — corresponding  to  the 
three  terms,  body,  soul,  and  spirit.'  It  is  implied  in  1  Thess.  5  :  23,  that  the  spirit 
needs  sanctification,  and  that  the  body  and  soul  also  are  to  be  preserved  for  God. 
Holding  fast  to  these  points,  we  shall  escape  many  of  the  false  inferences  drawn  from 
the  theory  of  the  tti-partite  nature  of  man  (trichotomy).  On  the  other  hand  we  must 
not  go  to  the  extreme  of  holding  that  the  'spirit'  is  the  renewed  nature,  hence  that 
man  hus  not  a  'spirit'  before  regeneration.  'It  must  be  held  fast,  that  man  could 
not  receive  the  Spirit  of  God  if  he  were  not  himself  a  spiritual  being ;  yet  it  is  a  sup- 
position of  the  Scriptures,  that,  since  the  fall,  the  spiritual  nature  is  bound  in  the 
natural  man,  and  does  not  come  >o  its  actuality'  (Lange).  This  view  includes  'the 
mind,'  and  '  the  inward  man  '  (see  5.  below)  under  the  term  '  spirit,'  making  the  spirit 
the  sphere  in  which  Divine  influences  begin  their  operations,  like  God  in  mode  of 
being,  but  the  very  inmost  seat  of  moral  unlikeness  to  Him.  Before  renewal  the  '  spirit ' 
is  itself  under  the  power  of  the  'flesh  '  (see  4.,  (1.),  (b.).  below).  The  New  Testament 
never  contrasts  '  flesh '  with  this  sense  of  '  spirit.'  Hence  this  anthropological  sense  is 
rare  compared  with  that  which  follows. 

(c.)  The  soteriological  sen-ie  :  The  Holy  Spirit  in  the  human  spirit,  or,  the  human 
spirit  acted  upon  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  As  distinguished  from  (a.)  this  is  the  subjective 
sense,  as  distinguished  from  (6.  it  is  a  'he  liqical  sense.  In  Paul's  writings  it  is  very 
frequent,  and  we  find  it  expressed  in  the  Gospels :  '  that  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit  is 
spiriV  (J(.>hn  3 :  G) ;  comp.  Matt  26  :  4  ;  Mark  14  :  38.  This  sense  includes  the  term 
'  new  man  ; '  comp.  also  Eph.  4:  24  ;  Col.  3 :  10. 

4.  Flesh.  (I.)  Physical  sense.  In  the  Old  Testament  this  term  is  applied  to  '  man 
with  the  adjunct  idea  of  frailty  '  '  Tholnck),  but  the  idea  of  depravity  is  not  suggested. 
In  the  New  Testament  the  physical  sense  occurs,  with  a  reference  to  the  early  life  and 
relations  (Gal.  2  :  20  ;  2  Cor.  10  :  3  ;  Eph.  2 :  15 ;  Phil.  1 :  22,  24  ;  Col.  1 :  22,  etc.).  In 
these  instances  the  contrast  with  man'.s  new  relation  to  Gk)d  is  only  negatively  implied. 
In  other  cases  the  term  is  almost  =  body,  or  to  the  material  of  which  the  body  is  com- 
posed. *  According  to  the  flesh,'  as  applied  to  Christ,  refers  to  His  human  nature  (or, 
descent),  probably  with  the  idea  of  frailty,  as  in  the  Old  Testament  use.  Here,  too, 
we  may  trace  the  notion  of  physiological  descent,  suggesting  the  transmission  of  na- 
ture, a  thought  not  remote  from  the  strictly  ethical  sense;  comp.  John  3:6:  'that 
which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh.' 

(2.)  The  ethical  sense  of  flesh  is  recognized  by  all  commentators.  It  is  in  contrast 
with  '  Spirit,'  either  expressed  or  implied,  and  this  gives  the  key  to  its  meaning,  i.  e., 
tliat  it  refers  to  our  unregenerate  depraved  nature,  but  the  exact  significance  has  been 
frequently  discussed. 

(a.)  How  much  of  man's  nature  is  included  under  the  term  'flesh,'  when  used  in  the 
ethical  sense?  We  answer  more  than  the  body,  or  the  body  with  its  animal  life  and 
appetites.  The  Bible  nowhere  justifies  the  Pagan  view  that  sin  is  confined  to  our 
animal  life.  Nor  can  we  limit  the  term  to  body  and  soul,  excluding  the  human  spirit 
from  the  empire  of  the  flesh.  The  distinction  between  soul  and  spirit  is  not  essen- 
tially an  ethical  one ;  the  only  passage  suggesting  this  is  1  Cor.  2:  14,  where  'spi- 
ritual,' however,  implies  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  antithesis  to  'flesh  ' 
in  this  ethical  sense  never  is  the  unregenerate  human  spirit.  Even  in  Rom.  7  :  18, 
25,  wheie  '  inward  man,'  and  '  mind  '  are  contrasted  with  '  flesh,'  the  real  antithesis  la 


118  ROMANS  VII.  [7:  25. 

to  be  found  in  ver.  14  :  '  the  law  is  spiritual,  but  I  am  carnal,'  which  is  illustrated  in 
the  description  that  follows.  '  Flesh,'  therefore,  means,  not  a  tendency  or  direction  of 
life  in  one  part  of  man's  nature,  but  the  whole  human  nature,  body,  soul,  and  spirit, 
separated  from  God,  the  human  nature  we  inherit  '  according  to  the  flesh,'  from 
Adam.  Meyer  and  seme  recent  English  commentators  fail  to  give  the  full  force  (comp. 
Weiss,  Bib.  Theology,  and  throughout  on  Romann). 

(b.)  This  human  nature,  termed  '  flesh,'  is  essentially  alienated  from  God;  antago- 
nism to  God  is  the  essence  of  sin.  Its  positive  principle  is  ^eljishness,  for  after  God  is 
rejected,  self  becomes  supreme.  The  humaa  nature,  thus  alienated  from  God,  with 
selfishness  as  its  ruling  principle,  seeks  its  gratification  in  the  creature,  for  it  has  for- 
saken God,  and  it  requires  some  object  external  to  itself.  This  devotion  to  the  crea^ 
tuie  has  a  higher  form  as  sensuousness,  and  deems  itself  noble,  in  its  intellectual  and 
esthetic  pursuit  of  other  things  more  than  God.  But  the  course  of  heathenism,  as 
portrayed  in  chap.  1,  shows  that  it  is  an  easy  step  to  sensuality,  tlie  lower  form  of 
fleshly  gratification.  Hence  this  ethical  sense  of  '  flesh  '  has  been  confused  with  its 
lowest  manifestations,  namely,  physical  appetites.  But  the  true  definition  is  :  '  Flesh 
is  the  whole  nature  of  man,  turned  away  from  God,  in  the  supreme  interest  of  self, 
devoted  to  the  creature.'  This  definition  links  together  ungodliness  and  sin,  and  im- 
plies the  iua'jility  of  the  law,  and  the  necessity  of  the  renewing  iuttuencej  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

5.  MiXD.  The  word  translated  '  mind  '  in  the  preceding  section  is  vov<;,  and  may  be 
distinguished  from  several  other  Greek  terms  occasionally  rendered  hy  the  same  Eng- 
lish word.  As  indicated  in  the  above  comments,  '  mind  '  here  is  not  equivalent  to  re- 
newed nature,  nor  does  it  include  merely  the  intellectual  faculties.  It  is  rather  the 
active  organ  of  the  human  spirit,  the  practical  reason,  usuall3'  as  directed  to  moral 
questions.  Hence  it  properly  covers  what  we  term  the  moral  sense,  or  conscience. 
But  the  Scriptural  anthropology  does  not  favor  the  view  that  this  '  mind '  of  itself  is 
not  depraved  ;  for  it  is  used  several  times  in  connection  with  the  worst  forms  of  hea- 
thenism, and  in  other  passages  obviously  means  a  sinful  mind  (chap.  1  :  28 ;  Eph.  4 : 
17  ;  Col.  2  .•  IS  ;  1  Tim.  6 :  5  ;  2  Tim.  3:8;  Tit.  1  :  15).  The  '  inward  man '  (ver.  22^  is 
practically  equivalent  to  this  term,  and  represents  the  same  moral  status:  before  re- 
generation under  the  dominion  of  the  flesh,  but  made  the  sphce  of  the  operations  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  so  that  a  '  new  man  '  results,  in  whom  the  Holy  Spirit  dwells.  But 
both  'mind  '  and  '  inward  man  '  may  cover  the  whole  immaterial  nature  of  man  ;  the 
former  in  its  moral  and  intellectual  aspects;  the  latter  in  its  theological  aspects  (so 
Ellicott). 

6.  Heaet.  Although  this  term  occurs  with  comparative  infrequency  in  this  Epistle, 
it  is  important  to  understand  its  application  in  the  Xew  Testament.  More  distinctly 
than  any  of  the  other  terms  it  shows  the  influence  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  re- 
garded as  the  central  organ  of  the  entire  human  persoualit)',  and  includes  what  we 
distinguish  as  intellect  and  feeling,  sometimes  the  will  also  It  is  the  organ  of  l)Oth 
soul  and  spirit,  and  yet  is  sometimes  distinguished  from  the  former  (c  mp.  the  sum  of 
the  commandments  :  '  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God,  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with 
all  thy  soul,'  etc.  ,  never  from  the  latter,  although  occasionally  used  as  equivalent  to 
it  (comp.  Col  2 :  5  with  1  Thess.  2 :  17).  Hence  it  is  inferred  that  it  is  more  closely 
allied  to '  spirit '  than  to  '  soul ; '  but  we  must  beware  of  making  divisions,  where  only 
phases  of  a  vital  unity  are  concerned.  The  important  point  to  be  remembered  is,  that 
while  '  heart'  includes  the  affections,  the   term  in  the  Scriptures  does  not  imply  the 


8:  2.]  ROMANS  VIII.  119 

Chapter  8  :  1-17. 

The   Life  in  the  Spirit  contrasted  with  the  Life  after  the 

Flesh. 

1         There  is  therefore  now  no  condemnation  to  them 

contrast  we  make  between  '  head  '  and  '  heart,'  i.  e.,  intellect  and  affections.  In  chap. 
10  :  9,  10,  believing  is  predicated  of  the  'heart,'  but  in  contrast  with  confessing  with 
the  '  mouth,'  not  with  intellectual  credence.  Hence  the  phrase  '  new  heart '  implies 
far  more  than  a  change  of  feeling,  just  as  '  repentance  '  suggests  more  than  our  Eng- 
lish 'change  of  miud,'  which  is  the  literal  sense  of  the  Greek.  For  'mind'  and 
'  heart '  alike,  according  to  the  Hebrew  conceptions,  had  moral  aspects  which  were  the 
controlling  and  important  ones.  '  Heart,"  therefore,  when  used  in  the  New  Testament 
in  a  psychological  (not  physiological)  sense,  implies  a  mural  quality,  but  what  that 
moral  quality  is  depends  on  the  connection.  In  the  case  of  the  regenerate  man  the 
'heart'  is  spoken  of  as  if  it  were  the  seat  of  the  Holy  Spirifs  influence  (chap.  5:5; 
2  Cor.  1 :  22  ;  Gal.  4 :  G ;  Eph.  3  :  10,  17).— The  incidental  meanings  of  the  term  may 
be  readily  determined. 

Clearly,  then,  the  New  Testament  use  of  terms  serv-es  to  emphasize  the  language  of 
the  Apostle  in  ver.  24  :  '0  wretched  man  that  I  am  !  who  shall  deliver  me  from  the 
body  of  this  death  ? '  All  the  powers  and  organs  of  human  nature  are  powerless  fiom 
this  organism  of  sin,  until  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  deliverance  comes. 

Chapter  8. 

III.  The  Life  in  the  Spirit  over  against  the  Failure  of  the 
Law  ;  THE  Gospel  as  the  Power  of  God  unto  Present  Salvation 
FROM  Sin. 

This  chapter  is  '  the  clima.x  of  the  Epistle  '  (Tholuck).  The  gospel  is  a  present  power 
unto  salvation  ;  the  law  has  proven  a  failure,  both  in  justifying  (chap.  .3)  and  in  sanc- 
tifying men  (chap.  7),  but  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  not  only  are  justified,  but 
also  have  a  new  life  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  Hence  3Ieyer  gives  as  the  theme  of  the  chapter : 
'  the  happy  condition  of  a  man  in  Christ.'  Hodge  prefers  the  heading  :  '  the  security 
of  the  believer.' — The  whole  chapter  may  be  summed  up  thus  :  the  life  in  the  Spirit 
leads  to  fellowship  with  Christ  in  suffering  and  glory  (vers.  1-17) ;  in  this  fellowship 
of  suffering  we  have  three  grounds  of  encouragement  insuring  our  blessedness,  attest; 
ing  our  security  (ver.  18-30) ;  the  believer  has  nothing  to  fear,  for  nothing  can  separate 
him  from  the  love  of  God  (vers.  :il-39>.  'This  chapter  carries  us  into  the  inmost 
circle  and  heart  of  Christianity  ;  it  treats  of  that  peculiar  state  of  beatitude  of  refined 
and  chastened  joy,  for  which  no  form  of  secularism  is  able  to  provide  even  the  re- 
motest equivalent'  (Sanday). 

(1.)  The  Life  in  the  Spirit  contrasted  with  the  Life  after  the  Flesh,  vers.  1-17. 

The  Christian  is  free  from  condemnation  (ver.  1),  because  he  is  freed  from  the  law 
of  sin  (ver.  2),  a  result  which  the  law  could  not  accomplish,  but  which  is  accomplished 
by  God  through  Christ  (vers.  3,  4).  Hence  he  lives  according  to  the  Spirit,  not 
according  to  the  flesh,  for  the  former  life  is  true  life,  the  latter  is  death,  and  those  who 
are  in  this  condition  cannot  please  God  (vers.  5-8).     The  test  of  true  spiritual  life  is 


120  ROMANS  VIII.  [8 :  2. 

2  that  are  in  Christ  Jesus.     For  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of 
life  ill  Christ  Jesus  made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin 

the  indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  pledge  of  the  resurrection  of  our  bodies  (vers.  9- 
11).  Therefore  we  ought  not  to  live  after  the  flesh,  but  through  the  Spirit  mortify  the 
deeds  of  the  body  (vers.  12,  13),  being  sons  of  God  (ver.  14),  having  the  witness  of  the 
Spirit  of  adoption  (vers.  15,  16),  and  thus  assured  of  the  future  glory  which  will  fol- 
low the  present  suflering  in  fellowship  with  Christ  i,ver.  17). 

Ver.  1.  There  is  therefore  no-w,  at  this  time.  'Therefore' 
sums  up  what  precedes.  But  the  exact  connection  is  disputed.  It 
may  be  joined  either  (1.)  with  the  thanksgiving,  at  the  beginning  of 
ver.  2o ;  (2.)  or  with  the  whole  of  ver.  25;  (3.)  or  with  the  entire 
preceding  section.  With  the  view  we  have  taken  of  the  previous  de- 
scription, ^t  seems  best,  to  connect  it  with  the  thanksgiving.  Meyer 
finds  '  now'  explained  in  ver.  2,  '  now  that  Christ  has  freed  me.'  This 
is  really  taking  up  the  thanksgiving  again.  Some,  who  refer  the  pre- 
ceding experience  to  the  regenerate,  explain  thus :  '  Although  I  am 
thus  divided  in  service,  still,  being  in  Christ  Jesus,  there  is  now  there- 
fore,' etc.— No  condemnation.  'No'  is  in  emphatic  position. 
Some  confine  this  to  the  act  of  justification  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Christian  life,  but  it  is  better  to  refer  it  to  the  state  of  justification 
which  culminates  in  final  acquittal  and  glory.  For  here  the  Apostle 
is  treating  of  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  the  context  points  to 
the  Spirit's  work  of  sanctification. — In  Christ  Jesus.  In  vital  union 
with  Him;  the  phrase  being  a  deeply  significant  one;  comp.  John 
15:  1-7;  Eph.  1:  23.  The  clause,  'who  walk'  not,'  etc.,  is  to  be 
rejected,  being  probably  taken  from  ver.  4.  This  addition  weakens 
the  Apostle's  statement,  by  making  the  walk  appear  as  the  ground  of 
'  no  condemnation.' 

Ver.  2.  For  introduces  the  proof  that  there  is  '  no  condemnation.' 
— Law  of  the  Spirit  of  life.  'Law'  is  here  to  be  taken  in  its 
wide  sense,  the  principle,  ruling  power,  etc.  The  reference  is  not  to 
the  moral  law,  or  the  Mosaic  law,  or  to  the  law  of  the  mind,  nor  yet 
to  the  gospel  as  a  system,  but  to  the  new  principle  of  living  which 
comes  from  the  working  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  here  called  the  Spirit  of 
life,  because  it  gives  life,  works  life  in  us. — In  Christ  Jesus.  This 
should  be  joined  with  what  follows.  The  deliverance  took  place  in 
virtue  of  union  to  Hira  who  fulfilled  the  law  and  delivers  from  its 
bondage. — Made  me  free.  The  reference  is  to  a  single  act ;  not, 
however,  to  justification,  but  to  the  first  act  of  ethical  emancipation 
which  attends  it,  because  the  Spirit  then  begins  its  Avork.  The  whole 
verse  refers  to  what  occurs  in  the  man  who  i-*  in  Christ  Jesus. — The 
law  of  sin  and  death.  Not  the  Mosaic  law,  as  those  hold  who 
refer  '  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life '  to  the  gospel  system,  but  rather,  as 
chap.  7  :  23-25  indicates,  the  old  principle  of  sin  which  held  us  cap- 
tive, and  which  had  '  death,'  spiritual  and  eternal,  as  its  consequence. 
It  ia  this  consequence  which  is  denied  in  ver.  1.     There  is  no  con- 


8:3.]  ^  ROMANS  VIII.  121 

3  and  of  death.     For  what  the  law  could  not  do,  Mn 
that  it  was  weak  through  the  flesh,  God,  sending  his 

1  Or,  wherein. 

demnation,  not  only  because  in  Christ  Jesus  we  have  the  ground  of  full 
justification,  but  because,  at  our  justification,  in  virtue  of  our  union 
with  Christ,  we  receive  from  the  Holy  Spirit  a  new  principle  of  life, 
an  act  of  emancipation  occurs,  which  has  as  its  development  and  con- 
sequence progressive  sanctification. 

Ver,  3.  For  -what  the  la-w  could  not  do  ;  lit.,  '  the  impossible 
(thing)  of  the  law.'  The  Mosaic  law  is  certainly  meant.  What  was 
impossible  for  the  law  to  do,  God  did,  i.  e.,  condemned  sin,  etc.  This 
is  better  than  to  explain :  *  in  view  of  the  powerlessness  of  the  law.' 
— In  that  it  "was  "weak  through  the  flesh.  Its  weakness  has 
been  proven  by  the  experience  of  chap.  7,  and  this  was  '  through  the 
flesh,'  for  this  depraved  nature  was  the  means  of  setting  forth  its 
weakness.  'In  that'  is  almost  equivalent  to  'because,'  though  the 
marginal  rendering  suggests  another  view. — God,  sending  his  0"wn 
Son.  It  was  by  sending  Him,  that  He  accomplished  what  was  im- 
possible for  the  law.  '  His  own  Son,'  preexisting  before  He  was  sent, 
and  that  too  as  Son,  in  a  specific  sense. — In  the  likeness  of  sinful 
flesh  (-of  the  flesh  of  sin').  Notice  the  careful  wording  of  this  de- 
scription of  the  humanity  of  Christ.  The  characteristic  of  '  flesh/. 
i.  e.,  our  ordinary  human  nature,  is  'sin  ; '  in  the  'likeness'  of  this 
the  Son  of  God  appeared.  He  was  entirely  human,  hence  we  do  not 
find  here,  'in  the  likeness  of  flesh'  ;  He  was  entirely  sinlei-s,  hence 
he  was  not  '  in  the  flesh  of  sin,'  but  only  '  in  the  likeness  of  the  flesh 
of  sin.' — And  as  an  offering  for  sin  (and  for  sin,  Am.  Com.). 
The  Eng.  Com.  restrict  this  clause  to  expiation  for  sin  ;  but  this  seems 
a  forced  interpretation  of  the  words.  The  idea  of  expiation  is  of 
course  included,  but  the  reference  is  more  general :  '  in  order  by  ex- 
piating sin  to  destroy  it'  (Philippi). — Condemned  sin  in  the 
flesh.  This  was  what  the  law  could  not  do,  '  Sin'  has  the  article  in 
the  original,  pointing  to  the  '  sin'  on  account  of  which  the  Law  of  God 
was  sent  into  the  world.  'In  the  flesh'  is  to  be  joined  with  'con- 
demned,' referring  to  the  human  nature  which  Christ  has  in  common 
with  us.  It  seems  objectionable  to  take  it  in  the  ethical  sense,  or  to 
apply  it  only  to  the  human  nature  of  Christ.  '  Sin  had  tyrannized 
over  us  in  our  flesh,  as  the  seat  of  its  empire ;  and  by  our  flesh,  as  its 
instrument  and  weapon.  But  God  used  our  flesh  as  an  insti-uraent  for 
our  deliverance,  and  for  the  condemnation  of  sin,  and  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  His  own  empire  in  us'  (Wordsworth).  As  the  Apostle  is 
treating  of  the  emancipation  from  the  power  of  sin  (ver.  2),  it  is  un- 
necessary to  confine  this  condemnation  of  sin  in  the  flesh  to  the  expia- 
tion of  Christ.  By  sending  Christ,  God  condemned  sin  entirely,  both 
as  to  its  punitive  and  polluting  eff"ects.  The  one  great  act  by  which 
sin  was  condemned  in  the  flesh  was  the  death  of  Christ,  and  this  expi- 
ating act  was  the  delivering  act  which  should  destroy  the  power  of  sin. 


122  ROMANS  VIII.  [8  :  4,  5. 

own  Son  in  the  likeness  of  ^  sinful  flesh  ^  and  as  an 

4  offering  for  sin,"*"  condemned  sin  in  the  flesh  ;  that  the 
^ordinance  of  the  law  might  be  fulfilled   in  us,  who 

5  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  spirit.  For  they 
that  are  after  the  flesh  do  mind  the  things  of  the 
flesh  ;  but  they  that  are  after  the  spirit  f  the  things  of 

1  Gr.  flesh  of  sin.  2  Qr,  and  for  sin 

*Letmarg.  -  {aiid  for  sin)  and  text  exchange  p'aces. — Am.  Com. 

3  Or,  requirement.  f  For  spirit  read  S2)irif.—Atn.   Com. 

For  while  the  law  could,  to  a  certain  extent,  condemn  and  punish  sin, 
what  was  utterly  impossible  for  it  was  the  removal  of  sin.  Those  in 
Christ  have  in  the  fact  of  His  death  the  ground  of  pardon  and  the 
pledge  of  purity.  The  removal  of  sin  is  the  end  to  be  accomplished, 
as  the  next  verse  shows. 

Ver.  4,  That  the  ordinance  of  the  la-w.  The  word  is  that 
used  in  chap.  5  :  16,  18,  in  the  sense  of  'righteous  verdict,'  or,  '  act 
of  righteousness,'  and  in  Luke  1:6;  chaps.  1 :  32 ;  2 :  26,  in  the  sense 
of  'ordinance,'  i.  e.,  righteous  requirement.  We  explain  it  here  as 
meaning  '  the  righteous  act '  (viewing  all  the  acts  as  forming  a  unity) 
that  meets  the  requirements  of  the  law.)  Some  would  refer  this  to 
the  imputation  of  Christ's  righteousness  as  the  ground  of  our  justifi- 
cation, but  according  to  our  view  of  the  whole  passage  it  means  the 
actual  holiness  of  the  believer. — Might  be  fulfilled.  The  fulfilment 
is  wrought  by  God  who  sent  his  Son  (ver.  3)  and  who  sends  his  Spirit 
to  fulfil  the  purpose  of  His  grace. — In  us ;  not,  '  among  us,'  nor, 
'through  us,'  nor  yet,  'on  us,'  but  'in  us.'  This  points  to  actual 
holiness ;  most  of  the  other  interpretations  grow  out  of  the  reference 
to  justification.  The  ideal  aim  of  the  Christian  life  is  set  forth. — 
Who  walk.  etc.  '  Who  are  of  such  a  kind  as  walk,'  etc.  This  part 
of  the  verse  is  an  explanation  of  the  character  of  those  in  whom  the 
fulfilment  takes  place,  and  neither  the  result,  nor  the  cause  of  what 
precedes. — Not  after  the  flesh.  Here,  and  in  the  rest  of  the  sec- 
tion, '  flesh'  has  its  strict  ethical  sense  (see  Excursus  at  close  of  chap. 
7). — But  after  the  Spirit.  The  reference  here,  as  well  as  in 
the  subsequent  verses,  seems  to  be  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  Others  ex- 
plain :  the  spiritual  nature  imparted  by  the  Holy  Spirit  (the  renewed 
nature) ;  the  subjective  spiritual  life-principle.  Here  especially  any 
subjective  sense  is  inappropriate,  for  '  he  walks  according  to  the  Spirit, 
who  follows  the  guidance,  the  impelling  and  regulating  power  (ver.  2), 
of  the  Holy  Spirit'  (Meyer).  A  reference  to  the  human  spirit  alone 
is  preposterous,  in  view  of  the  Pauline  anthropology. 

Ver.  5.  For  they,  etc.  In  chap.  7  the  contrast  was  between  the 
workings  of  the  law  and  the  flesh  in  the  same  person  ;  in  vers.  5-8 
the  Apostle  contrasts  two  classes  of  persons  ;  showing  why  the 
righteousness  of  the  law  is  fulfilled  in  one  class  and  cannot  be  in  the 


8 :  6-8.]  ROMANS  VIII.  123 

6  the  spirit.     For  the  mind  of  the  flesh  is  death ;  but 

7  the  mind  of  the  spirit  *  is  life  and  peace ;  because  the 
mind  of  the  flesli  is  enmity  against  God ;  for  it  is  not 
subject  to  the  law  of  God,  neither  indeed  can  it  be : 

8  and  they  that  are  in  the  flesh   cannot  please  God. 

*  For  spirit  read  Spirit. — Am.  Com. 

other. — That  are  after  the  flesli.  The  same  idea  as  in  ver.  4,  but 
untler  a  slightly  different  aspect  :  walking  according  to  the  flesh  point- 
ing to  the  outward  life;  being  according  to  the  flesh,  to  the  carnal 
state. — Mind  the  things  of  the  flesh  ;  they  think  of,  care  for, 
strive  to  obtain,  those  things  which  belong  to  the  '  flesh,'  which  in- 
cludes all  that  gratifies  the  depraved  heart ;  '  not  merely  sensual 
things,  but  all  things  which  do  not  belong  to  the  category  of  the 
things  of  the  Spirit'  (Hodge). — The  things  of  the  Spirit,  those 
things  which  belong  to  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Ver.  6.  For  the  mind  of  the  flesh.  Explanation  of  ver.  5. 
The  word  '  mir.d '  corresponds  with  the  verb  '  mind  '  in  the  last  verse; 
it  is  that  which  embodies  the  thinking  caring,  striving ;  the  disposi- 
tion, we  might  call  it. — Is  death  ;  amounts  to  death.  '  Death  is  here 
conceived  of  as  present  (comp.  1  Tim,  5:6;  Eph.  2:1,  5),  not  merely 
as  a  result,  but  as  a  charac<^eristic  mark,  an  immanent  defi'^.Ttion  of  the 
carnal  mind'  (Philippi). — The  mind  of  the  Spirit.  Here  also  the 
Holy  Spirit ;  the  minding,  striving,  which  comes  from  the  Holy  Spirit. 
— Life  and  peace.  '  Life '  is  to  be  taken  in  its  full  sense,  in  contrast 
with  '  death  ;'  '  peace'  is  added,  probably  to  prepare  for  ver.  7,  where 
'  enmity  '  is  introduced. 

Ver.  7.  Because  the  mind  (the  same  word  as  in  ver.  6)  of  the 
flesh.  Proof  that  the  mind  of  the  flesh  is  death  (ver.  6) ;  in  \ers.  10, 
11,  it  is  proved  that  the  mind  of  the  spirit  is  life  and  peace,  though 
that  is  implied  here. — Enmity  against  God.  This  i^  equivalent  to 
death. — For  introduces  an  illustration  and  evidence  of  this  enmity. — 
It  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of  God.  This  fact,  already  set  forth 
in  the  previous  description  of  man  (chap.  1  :  11)  and  of  the  work  of 
the  law  (chap.  7),  shows  that  the  enmity  is  not  latent,  but  active. — 
Neither  indeed  can  it  be.  'For  it  is  not  even  po?si;)le  for  it' 
(Meyer).  Paul  declares  that  the  cause  of  non-submission  to  the  law 
of  God,  which  is  a  p^-oof  of  enmity  to  God.  is  the  fact  that  the  mind 
of  the  flesh  has  no  ability  to  produce  this  submission,  being  essentially 
antagonism  to  God.  Possibility  of  conversion  and  ability  to  believe 
are  not  under  discussion ;  these  imply  the  death  of  the  flesh  as  a  ruling 
principle. 

Ver.  8.  And.  Not,  •'  so  then,'  but  a  simple  continuation  of  the 
thought  of  ver.  7.— They  that  are  in  the  flesh.  Substantially  the 
same  as  :  '  they  that  are  according  to  the  flesh '  (ver.  5),  but  stronger, 
and  presenting  a  better  contrast  to  the  full  gospel  phrases  :  '  in  Christ' 
^in  the  Spirit.'— Cannot  please   God,  because  of  the  character  of 


124  ROMANS  VIII.  [8 :  9-10. 

9  But  ye  are  not  in  the  flesh,  but  in  the  spirit,*  if  so  be 

that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwelleth  in  you.     But  if  any 

man  hath  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his. 

10  And  if  Christ  is  in  you,  the  body  is  dead  because  of 

*  For  spirit  read  Spirit. — Am.  Com. 

the  mind  of  the  flesh.  By  this  negative  expression,  'it  is  said,  in  a 
mild  way,  that  they  are  objects  of  Divine  displeasure,  childien  of 
wrath '  (Lange). 

Ver.  9.  But  ye,  etc.  The  Apostle  now  turns  to  the  other  class, 
spoken  of  in  ver.  5,  gladly  using  direct  address,  for  '  ye '  is  emphatic 
in  the  original. — If  so  be.  This  conditional  form  is  •'  an  indirect  in- 
citement to  self-examination'  (Meyer),  and  does  not  imply  special 
doubt.— The  Spirit  of  God  dwell  in  you.  In  the  previous  clause 
the  '  Spirit '  is  represented  as  the  element  in  which  they  live  ;  here  as 
the  indwelling  power  which  enables  them  to  live  in  this  element.  This 
change  of  figure  is  quiie  common  in  the  New  Testament  language  re- 
specting the  Holy  Spirit.  Thai  the  Holy  Spirit  is  here  meant  ought 
not  to  be  doubted.  '  In  you'  must  not  be  weakened  into  'among  you.' 
— But  if.  This  is  a  pure  hypothesis,  and  does  not  imply  that  such 
was  the  case. — Hath  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ.  There  is  no  better 
evidence  of  careless  reading  of  the  Scripture  than  the  frequent  use  of 
this  clause  as  if  it  referred  to  the  temper  or  disposition  shown  by 
Christ.  It  means  the  Holy  Spirit  which  belongs  to,  or  proceeds  from, 
Christ,  this  designation  being  adopted  to  prove  the  truth  that  those  who 
have  not  this  Spirit  are  '  none  of  Christ's.'  The  whole  passage  has  an 
important  bearing  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  especially  as  related 
to  Christian  experience.  It  must  be  admitted  that  such  statements 
generally  have  reference  to  the  economy  of  grace,  but  they  form  the 
basis  for  the  doctrinal  statements  of  the  Church.  This  text  has  thei-e- 
fore  been  a  proof  text  for  the  Westei-n  doctrine  of  the  procession  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  from  the  Father  and  the  Son  [filioque,  Synod  of  Toledo 
A.  D.  589).  This  was  the  final  contribution  to  the  doctrinal  statement 
of  the  Trinity.  The  Greek  Church  admits  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
sent  by  the  Son  as  well  as  the  Father,  but  denies  that  Hq  proceeds  eter- 
nally, or,  metaphysically  from  the  Son.  The  sending  belongs  to  the 
economical  Trinity  ;  the  ^i^rndiWy  proceeding,  to  the  ontological  Trinity. 
— He  is  none  of  his.  He  does  not  belong  to  Christ,  perhaps  im- 
plying that  the  Spirit  unites  the  members  of  the  mystical  body  of  Christ 
to  their  Head,  and  that  without  this  Spirit  such  union  "does  not  exist. 

Ver.  10.  And  if  Christ  is  in  you.  Not  doubt,  but  rather  a  sug- 
gestion that  this  is  the  case ;  in  contrast  with  the  latter  part  of  ver.  9. 
Not'ce  that  the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  having  Ae  Spirit  of 
Christ,  belonging  to  Christ,  having  Christ  in  us,  are  only  varied  ex- 
pressions of  the  same  great  fact.  The  underlying  basis  of  the  mysti- 
cal union  of  Christ  and  the  believer  is  the  yet  more  mysterious  unity 
of  the  Persons  of  the  Godhead. — The   body  is  dead.     Thiis  refers 


8:  11  ]  ROMANS  VIII.  125 

sin;  but  the  spirit  is  life  because  of  righteousness. 
11  But  if  the  Spirit  of  him  that  raised  up  Jesus  from  the 
dead  dwelleth  in  you,  he  that  raised  up  Christ  Jesus 
from  the  dead  shall  quicken  also  your  mortal  bodies 
through  his  Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you. 

1  Many  ancient  authorities  read  becatise  of. 

to  the  certain  fact  of  physical  death,  since  ver.  11  takes  up  this  thought. 
Every  other  interpretation  gives  to  'body'  an  ethical  sense,  which 
seems  unwarranted  ;  all  the  more  because  '.he  word  '  dead  '  is  not  that 
corresponding  with  '  death,'  as  used  by  the  Apostle  in  the  wide  sense. 
— Because  of  sin.  Not  because  of  the  special  sins  of  the  body,  nor 
because  the  body  is  the  source  and  seat  of  sin,  but  because  the  body 
has  shared  in  the  results  of  sin,  and  thus  becomes  a  prey  to  physical 
death.  It  will  uliimately  share  in  the  full  blessings  of  redemption 
(ver.  11). — But  the  spirit  is  life.  Not  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  the  re- 
newed human  spirit,  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  dwells.  This  is  sug- 
gested by  the  entire  context.  '  Life,'  not,  'alive,'  as  if  to  give  a  more 
extended  meaning  to  tbis  side  of  the  contrast.  Hence  we  may  include 
spiritual  life,  here  and  hereafter,  the  life  eternal,  beginning  now. — 
Because  of  righteousness.  Some  refer  this  to  the  imputed  right- 
eousness, but  while  this,  as  the  basis  of  the  life,  is  not  to  be  excJuded, 
the  whole  argument  points  to  actual  righteousness  of  life,  inwrought 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  virtue  of  union  to  Christ. 

Ver.  11.  But  if,  etc.  The  body  will  indeed  die,  but,  despite  this, 
grace  will  triumph  even  over  phj'sical  death  ;  even  the  body  that 
must  die  will  ultimately  share  fully  in  redemption,  at  the  resurrec- 
tion, through  the  indwelling  Holy  Spirit.— Him  that  raised  up 
Jesus  from  the  dead,  etc.  This  expression  has  a  demonstrative 
force  here:  the  fact  that  the  indwelling  Spirit  is  the  Spirit  of  Him 
who  raised  Jesus  from  the  dead  is  a  pledge  that  the  spiritual  quick- 
ening will  be  followed  by  the  physical  quickening. — Shall  quicken 
also  your  mortal  bodies.  This  is  most  naturally  referred  to  the 
final  resurrection  of  the  body ;  for,  although  '  quicken  '  might  of  itself 
include  something  already  begun,  the  word  'also'  (or,  as  it  might 
better  be  rendered,  '  even ' )  seems  to  limit  it  to  the  bodily  resurrection. 
This  truth  of  revelation  is  f^o  important,  and  so  distinctive,  that  it  de- 
serves the  emphasis  thus  given  to  it.  'Even'  the  body  which  here 
succumbs  to  the  effects  of  sin,  shall  be  quickened ;  the  victory  of  re- 
demption will  be  complete  when  this  occurs. — Through,  or,  '  on  ac- 
count of,'  his  Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you.  It  is  diflScult  to 
decide  between  the  two  readings.  The  Sinaitic  manuscript  supports 
'  through,'  and  has  turned  the  current  of  opinion  in  favor  of  that 
reading.  As  early  as  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth  century  the  varia- 
tion was  introduced  into  a  controversy  respecting  the  Divinity  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  '  Through  '  would  point  to  the  fact  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
which  is  now  working  moral  renovation  in  us  will  be  the  Agent  in 


126  ROMANS  VIII.  [8:  12-14. 


12  So  then,  brethren,  we  are  debtors,  not  to  the  flesh, 

13  to  live  after  the  flesh  :  for  if  ye  live  after  the  flesh, 
ye  must  die;  but  if  by  the  spirit*  ye  hnortifyf  the 

14  ^ deeds  of  the  body,  ye  shall  live.     For  as  many  as 

*  For  spirit  read  Spirit. — Am.  Com.  l  Gr.  make  to  die. 

t  For  mortify  read  put  to  death  and  omit  marg.  i. — Am.  Com. 
~  Gr.  doings. 

completing  tlie  triumph  in  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  '  Because  of 
may  include  this  thought,  but  would  refer  mainly  to  the  indwelling 
Spirit  as  the  pledge  of  the  resurrection.  If  this  Spirit  now  dwells  in 
the  body  of  the  believer,  that  body  will  not  be  left  unredeemed.  In 
either  case,  the  reference  seems  to  be  to  the  final  resurrection,  rather 
than  to  any  present  moral  quickening.  This  passage,  moreover,  in- 
dicates that  the  'spiritual  body  '  spoken  of  in  1  Cor.  15  :  44,  is  a  body 
prepared  for  the  human  spirit  entirely  renovated  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Ver.  12.  So  then;  as  the  phrase  :s  usually  translated;  here  in- 
troducing an  exhortation  based  upon  the  previous  statement;  because 
the  indwelling  of  the  Spirit  involves  such  glorious  results. — We  are 
debtors,  not  to  the  flesh.  '  Flesh  '  is  here  used  in  the  ethical 
sense  ;  the  antithesis  is  suggested  indirectly  in  ver.  13.  'Not'  applies 
to  the  following  clause  also  :  to  live  after  the  flesh.  The  truths  of 
vers.  10,  11  imply  that  we  are  under  obligation  7wt  to  do  this,  but  on 
the  contrary  to  live  after  the  Spirit.  Strictly  rendered,  this  clause  is 
one  of  design,  in  order  to  live  after  the  flesh. 

Ver.  13.  For,  etc.  If  you  lived  thus,  you  would  not  fulfil  the 
glorious  destiny  announced  in  ver.3.  10,  11.  Hence  this  is  a  proof  of 
ver.  12. — Ye  must  die,  are  about  to  die.  Death  in  the  fullest  sense 
is  here  meant,  not  eternal  death  alone,  and  certainly  not  physical 
death,  which  comes  to  all  men;  comp.  ver.  10. — But  if  ye  by  the 
Spirit;  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  agent  of  this  process. — Mortify  (put 
to  death,  Am.  Com.)  the  deeds  of  the  body.  'Deeds,'  or, 
'  practices,'  has  usually  a  bad  sense  in  the  New  Testament,  while  the 
'  body  '  is  here  regarded  as  the  organ  of  sin,  having  evil  practices 
which  the  Holy  Spirit  enables  us  to  put  to  death,  to  exterminate.  The 
term  '  bodj^'  is  not  equivalent  to  'flesh,'  here  or  elsewhere. — Ye 
shall  live.  '  Not  are  about  to  live ;  this  life  being  no  natural  conse- 
quence of  a  course  of  mortifying  the  deeds  of  the  body,  but  the  gift  of 
God  through  Christ;  and  coming,  therefore  in  the  form  of  an  assu- 
rance, "ye  shall  live,"  from  Christ's  Apostle'  (Alford). 

Ver.  14,  For  as  many  as,  etc.  This  introduces  the  reason  why 
we  '  shall  live,'  indicating  again  that  the  mortifying  (ver.  13)  is  the 
work  of  the  Holy  Spirit, — Led  by  the  Spirit  of  God ;  continu- 
ously and  specially  moved  by  the  Spirit,  in  their  whole  life.  '  The 
passive  form  expresses  its  complete  dominion,  without  at  the  same 
time  denying  the  voluntary  being  led  on  the  part  of  the  human  will ' 
(Lange). — These  are  sons  of  God.     These  and  none  other.     In 


8:  15,  16.]  ROMANS  VIII.  127 

are  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  these  are  sons  of  God. 

15  For  ye  received  not  the  spirit  of  bondage  again  unto 
fear ;  but  ye  received  the  spirit  of  adoption,  whereby 

16  we  cry,  Abba,  Father.     The  Spirit  himself   beareth 
witness  with  our  spirit  that  we  are  children  of  God  : 

the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  there  is  a  similar  line  of  argument,  but 
with  more  of  a  polemical  purpose  ;  yet  even  here  there  is  an  implied 
contrast  with  the  Jewish  notion  that  by  birth  they  were  entitled  to 
this  sonship. 

Ver.  15.  For  ye  received  not.  The  fact  that  they  are  '  sons'  is 
now  proven  from  their  Christian  experience  at  conversion. — The 
spirit  of  bondage,  etc.  The  latter  part  of  the  verse  most  naturally 
refers  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  many  find  a  difficulty  in  this  clause,  if 
such  a  reference  be  accepted.  But  the  difficulty  is  only  apparent,  as 
the  following  paraphrase  shows :  '  The  Spirit  ye  received  was  not  a 
spirit  of  bondage,  but  a  spirit  of  adoption.'  The  Apostle  does  not 
suggest  that  the  Holy  Spirit  could  be  a  spirit  of  bon'lage,  but  emphatic 
cally  denies  this.  This  view  is  confirmed  by  the  difficulties  which 
attend  the  other  explanation.  To  interpret:  a  slavish  spirit,  a  filial 
spirit,  is  not  only  weak,  but  contrary  to  the  New  Testament  use  of  the 
word  '  spirit.'  To  refer  it  to  the  subjective  spirit  of  the  renewed 
man  disturbs  the  antithesis. — Again  unto  fear.  '  In  order  again  to 
fear.'  '  Again,'  as  in  the  native  condition,  when  fear  was  the  motive 
of  religious  life.  This  applies  to  Gentile,  as  well  as  Jewish  Christians. 
All  unchristian  religiousness  is  in  principle  legalism,  which  is  a  bon- 
dage: an  I  bondage  produces  fear. — But  ye  received  the  spirit  of 
adoption.  The  repetition  is  for  emphasis.  Here  also  the  reference 
is  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  they  had  received;  this  Spirit  was  not 
that  of  bondage  to  make  them  fear,  but  of  adoption,  leading  to  the 
joyful  cry  '  Abba,  Father.'  They  were  sons  of  God,  not  by  birth,  but 
by  reason  of  grace  numbering  them  among  His  children  ;  the  par- 
ticular reference  be'ng  to  the  method  by  which  they  became  sons, 
rather  than  to  their  sonship. — Whereby.  More  exactly  '  wherein;' 
in  the  fellowship  of  the  Spirit  by  adoption,  we  cry,  Abba,  Father. 
'  Abba '  is  the  Syrian  name  for  '  Father,'  to  which  Paul  adds  the  equi- 
valent Greek  term.  This  repetition  seems  to  have  arisen  from  a  litur- 
gical formula,  originating  either  among  the  Hellenistic  Jews,  who 
retained  the  consecrated  word  '  Abba,'  or  among  the  Jews  of  Pales- 
tine, after  they  became  acquainted  with  the  Greek  language.  The 
latter  view  best  explains  the  use  of  it  in  Mark  14 :  36  ;  comp.  Gal. 
4:  6.  Some  add  the  notion  of  affectionate  address  in  '  Abba';  others 
find  a  hint  of  the  union  of  Jews  and  Gentiles  in  Christ. 

Ver.  16.  The  Spirit  himself;  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  gender  of 
'Spirit'  in  Greek  is  neuter;  see  marg.  rendering  of  Am.  Com.  in  ver. 
26,  which  should  have  been  given  here  also,  for  the  sake  of  con- 
sistency— Beareth    witness    with,    or,    'to,'    our    spirit,    our 


128  ROMANS  VIII.  [8:17. 

17  and  if  children,  then  heirs;  heirs  of  God,  and  joint- 
heirs  with  Christ :  if  so  be  that  we  sufiPer  with  him, 
that  we  may  be  also  glorified  with  him. 

renewed  spirit,  in  which  the  Holy  Spirit  dwells.  But  it  is  doubtful 
whether  we  should  render  '  with  '  or,  '  to.'  The  former  sense  neces- 
sarily involves  the  latter  (the  converse  is  not  true),  and  is  somewhat 
preferable  grammatically.  This  implies  a  two-fold  witness :  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  and  also  of  our  renewed  spirit.  If  it  be  asked  to  whom 
is  the  witness  borne  ?  the  answer  is  to  the  man  himself,  who  needs 
both  so  long  as  he  is  here  disturbed  by  doubt  and  sin.  The  clause  is 
an  important  one,  in  warranting  an  assurance  of  salvation,  and  also 
in  marking  the  distinction  between  the  Holy  Spirit  and  our  spirit. — 
That  "we  are  children  of  God.  This  is  what  is  testified,  and  for 
such  assurance  we  may  seek,  however  fanaticism  has  perverted  the 
passage.  '  That  the  world  deny  any  such  testimony  in  the  hearts  of 
believers,  and  that  they  look  on  it  with  scorn  and  treat  it  with  de- 
rision, proves  only  that  they  are  unacquainted  with  it;  not  that  it  is 
an  illusion'  (Stuart). 

Ver.  17.  And  if  children,  then.  Comp.  the  similar  but  fuller 
statement  in  Gal.  4:  7. — Heirs  of  God.  The  kingdom  of  glory  is 
their  inheritance.  '  As  He  Himself  will  be  all  in  all,  so  shall  His 
children  receive  with  Him,  in  His  Son,  everything  for  an  inheritance  ; 
1  Cor.  3:  21,  etc'  (Lange). — And  joint-heirs -with  Christ.  The 
Roman  law  made  all  children  (adopted  ones  included)  equal  heritors; 
but  the  Jewish  law  gave  a  doublo  portion  to  the  eldest  son.  Hence  a 
discussion  has  arisen  as  to  the  exact  reference  in  this  clause.  The 
Roman  law  would  be  naturally  in  the  Apostle's  mind  when  addressing 
Romans,  and  suits  the  context,  where  adopted  sonship  is  the  basis  of 
inheritance.  The  other  view  emphasizes  the  mediation  of  Christ, 
through  whom  we  inherit. — If  so  be,  etc.  This  is  the  order,  not  the 
reason  of  obtaining  full  salvation  (Calvin).  There  is  a  latent  admoni- 
tion in  the  conditional  form:  'if  so  be.'  On  the  sharing  of  these 
sufterings,  comp.  Col.  1  :  24. — That  "we  may  be  also  glorified 
with  him.  This  is  God's  purpose,  not  ours  ;  in  our  case  it  is  a 
result.  '  He  who  would  be  Christ's  brother  and  joint-heir,  must  bear 
in  mind  to  be  also  a  joint-martyr  and  joint-sufferer;  not  feeling 
Christ's  sufferings  and  shame  after  Him,  but  with  Him,  as  vers. 
10,  32,  33,  declare'  (Luther).  The  sufferings  are  needed  to  prepare 
us  for  the  glory.  We  suffered  as  He  suffered,  but  He  suffered  for  our 
sake,  and  we  suffer  for  our  own  good  ;  we  are  glorified  as  He  is  glori- 
fied, but  He  was  glorified  for  His  own  sake,  and  we  for  His  sake. 
His  sufferings  were  penal,  ours  are  purifying ;  His  glory  was  His  own, 
ours  is  a^ift  of  grace. 


8 :  18,  19.]  ROMANS  YIIL  129 

Chapter  8  :  18-39. 

Grounds  of  Encouragement,  attesting  the  Believer^s 
Security. 

18  For  I  reckon  that  the  sufferings  of  this  present 
time  are  not  worthy  to  be  compared  with  the  glory 

19  which  shall  be  revealed  to  us-ward.     For  the  earnest 
expectation  of  the  creation  waiteth  for  the  revealing 

(2.)  Grounds  of  Encouragement,  attesting       the  Believer's  Security,  vers. 

18-39. 

The  life  in  the  Spirit  in  solves  fellowship  ,/ith  Christ  in  suffering  and  glory  (ver. 
17).  The  sufferings  are  present,  while  tlie  glor^'  is  yet  future  ;  but  we  are  encouraged 
by  the  conviction  that  the  glory  will  far  outweigh  the  sufferings;  the  longing  of  the 
creation  is  an  intimation  that  it  will  share  in  the  full  glorification  Avhich  awaits  us, 
and  which  we  should  wait  for  in  patient  hope  (vers.  18-25).  A  further  ground  of 
encouragement  is  found  in  the  sustaining  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  interceding  for 
us,  and  that  too  according  to  the  will  of  the  heart-searching  God  (vers.  26,  27).  Fi- 
nally '  we  know  that  all  things  work  together  for  good '  to  Christians,  designated  as 
those  who  love  God,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  as  the  called  according  to  His  purpose 
(ver.  28).  Their  security  rests  upon  Wis  plan  of  salvation  (vers.  2'J,  30),  on  His  love 
as  proved  by  the  saving /acte  of  the  gospel  (vers.  31-34),  on  the  assurance  that  nothing 
can  -  eparate  us  from  the  love  of  Christ  (vers.  35-37).  An  expression  of  the  Apos- 
tle's personal  confidence  (vers.  38,  39)  forms  a  striking,  appropriate,  and  trium- 
phant conclusion  to  one  of  the  most  precious  passages  in  the  word  of  God. 

Ver,  18.  For.  This  connects  the  verse  with  the  whole  thought 
culminating  in  ver.  17  (see  above),  and  not  with  'glorified'  alone. — 
I  reckon.  No  doubtful  calculation  is  implied  ;  comp.  chap.  3 :  28. 
Alford  paraphrases:  '  I  myself  am  one  who  have  embraced  this  course, 
being  convinced  that.' — Not  worthy  to  be  compared  w^ith;  or, 
'insignificant  in  comparison  with.'  'Not  worthy'  is  slightly  objec- 
tionable as  suggesting  the  idea  of  merit,  which  is  foreign  to  the  course 
of  thought. — The  glory  -which  shall  be  revealed.  At  the  end 
of  'the  present  time,'  when  full  redemption  comes  with  the  coming  of 
the  Lord. — To  us-v^ard  (comp.  Eph.  1 :  19) ;  in  and  upon  us.  Of 
this  glory  Christians  are  the  subjects,  the  possessors,  and  the  centre 
also,  for  vers.  19-28  represent  the  creation  as  shariog  in  it. 

Ver.  19.  For  the  earnest  expectation.  The  idea  is  not  of 
anxiety,  but  of  a  constant  and  persistent  awaiting;  the  word  trans- 
lated 'earnest  expectation'  being  derived  from  one  which  means  'to 
expect  with  uplifted  head.'  This  verse  confirms  the  thought  of  ver. 
18,  by  indicating  the  greatness  of  the  future  glory  which  the  creation 
awaits,  probably  its  certainty  also.— Of  the  creation.  The  main 
question  resp  cts  the  exact  reference  of  the  term,  which  must  be  the 
same  throughout  the  passage,  (The  A,  V.  makes  an  unnecessary 
9 


130  ROMANS  VIII.  [8:  19 

variation  by  using  both  'creature'  and  'creation'  to  translate  the 
same  Greek  word.)  Undoubtedly  the  Apostle  means  the  things  cre- 
ated, not  the  act  of  creation,  but  how  much  is  included? 

Explanations. — 1.  The  entire  universe  without  any  limitation.  But 
this  does  away  with  the  contrast  to  '  sons  of  God,'  and  involves  incor- 
rect inferences.  2.  Inanimate  creation.  This  avoids  some  difficulties, 
but,  by  shutting  out  all  intelligent  creatures,  deprives  the  passage  of 
its  most  appropriate  application. —  3.  Humanity  alone,  either  as  a 
whole,  or  with  limitations.  This  seems  too  restricted.  Further,  if 
Christians  are  included,  the  contr.^st  with  'sons  of  God'  is  done  away; 
but  if  non-Christian  humanity  alone  is  meant,  it  is  singular  that  Paul 
should  choose  the  word  '  creation '  rather  than  the  common  term 
'  world.' — 4.  All  creation  except  humanity.  This  limitation  has  much 
in  its  favor,  (a.)  Believers  are  evidently  excluded  ;  {b.)  mankind  as 
a  whole  do  not  have  this  expectation;  (c. )  man  is  not  unwillingly 
subject  to  vanity  (ver.  20);  {d.)  ver.  21  points  to  the  fulfilment  of  the 
expectation  (but  see  below,  where  it  is  taken  as  giving  the  purport  of 
the  hope).  On  the  other  hand,  man  is  the  head  of  creation,  and  it 
seems  unnatural  to  exclude  him ;  man  is,  on  his  physical  side,  part  of 
the  material  creation,  if  that  be  referred  to,  it  seems  arbitrary  to 
exclude  him  from  it.  —  5.  •  The  material  world  surrounding  man ' 
(Thoiuck).  But  this  is  open  to  the  same  objections  as  (2.)  and  (4.) — 
6.  The  whole  creation,  rational  as  well  as  irrational,  not  yet  redeemed,  but 
needing  and  capable  of  redemption,  here  opposed  to  the  new  creation  in 
Christ  and  in  the  regenerate.  The  children  of  God  appear,  on  the 
one  side,  as  the  first  fruits  of  the  new  creation,  and  the  remaining 
creatures,  on  the  other,  as  consciously  or  unconsciously  longing  after 
the  same  redemption  and  renewal.  This  explanation  seems  to  be  the 
most  correct  one.  It  most  satisfactorily  accounts  for  the  expressions: 
expectation,  waiting,  groaning,  not  willingly  (ver.  20),  and  the  whole 
creation  (ver.  22).  The  whole  creation,  then,  looks  forward  to  redemp- 
tion ;  all  natural  birth,  to  the  new  birth.  As  all  that  is  created  pro- 
ceeded from  God,  so  it  all,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  strives  after 
Him  as  its  final  end.  What  shows  itself  in  nature  as  a  dim  impulse, 
in  the  natural  man,  among  the  heathen,  and  yet  more  among  the 
Jews,  under  the  influence  of  the  law,  comes  to  distinct  consciousness 
and  manifests  itself  in  that  loud  cry  after  deliverance  (chap.  8:  24), 
which  Christ  alone  can  satisfy;  and  then  voices  itself  in  happy  grati- 
tude for  the  actual  redemption  (SchafFin  Lange,  Romans).  This  view 
differs  from  (4)  in  including  man  in  his  fallen  condition,  as  the  head 
of  the  longing  creation  under  the  bondage  of  corruption.  His  material 
body  shares  in  this  corruption,  and  his  unregene'-ate  soul  responds 
with  an  indefinite  longing,  yet  too  often  uses  its  power  over  the  body 
to  stifle  the  inarticulate  desire  of  the  physical  nature.  In  any  case, 
the  degradation  of  sin  is  fearfully  manifest;  the  natural  man  is  less 
alive  to  the  'hope'  in  which  creation  has  been  subjected  (ver.  20) 
than  nature  itself. — Waiteth,  continues  to  wait. — The  revealing 
of  the  sons  of  God.     The  final  revealing  of  Christ's  glory  is  here 


8:20,21.]  ROMANS  VIII.  131 

20  of  the  sons  of  God.     For  the  creation  was  subjected  to 
vault V,  not  of  its  own  will,  but  by  reason  of  him  Avho 

21  subjected  it,  ^  in  hope  that  the  creation  itself  also  shall 

1  Or,  in  hope ;  because  the  creation,  &c. 
spoken  of  as  that  '  of  the  sons  of  God.'     Thus  the  Apostle  expresses 
his  deep  sense  of  the  fellowship  of  believers  with  Clirist.     This  reve- 
lation will  show  them  as  the  sons  of  God,  and  in  the  glory  then  to  be 
revealed  (ver.  18)  the  creation  will  share. 

Ver.  20.  For  the  creation  -was  subjected,  /.  e.,  by  God,  in 
consequence  of  the  fall  of  man  (see  close  of  the  verse). — To  vanity. 
It  became  empty,  lost  its  original  significance.  This  does  not  neces- 
sarily imply  a  change  in  matter  corresponding  to  the  fall  of  man,  but 
that  as  a  result  of  the  fall  the  whole  creation  fell  away  from  its  original 
design  ;  it  is  probable  that  ihus  its  development  was  checked,  and  it 
became  a  prey  to  corruption  (ver.  21). — Not  of  its  own  will.  The 
subjection  to  vanity  was,  therefore,  not  a  self-subjection,  but  by 
reason  of  him  -who  subjected  it.  The  reference  is  to  God,  not  to 
Adam  :  (1.)  the  verb  is  passive,  implying  that  the  subjection  was  in- 
tentional, which  could  not  be  true  of  Adam :  (2.)  The  will  of  God  was 
the  moving  cause,  but  the  expression  :  '  by  reason  of  Him'  (rather  than 
'  through  Him')  reverently  removes  this  supreme  will  of  God  to  a  wider 
distance  from  corruption  and  vanity  (comp.  Alford).  Hence  we  object 
to  the  intei'pretation  :  the  ci-eature  submitted  itself  to  vanity,  etc. — In 
hope.  Resting  on  hope.  This  is  to  be  joined  with  '  was  subjected,' 
rather  than  with  'subjected  it.'  Another  view  makes  the  previous 
part  of  ver.  20  parenthetical,  joining  '  in  hope'  with  ver.  19  ;  this  has 
much  to  recommend  it,  but  can  scarcely  be  insisted  upon. 

Ver.  21.  That  the  creation  itself  also.  This  view  of  the  con- 
nection seems  preferable  to  that  of  the  A.  V.,  which,  however,  deserves 
the  place  given  it  in  the  margin  of  the  R.  V.  (The  Greek  word  means 
either  'that,'  or  'because.')  We  thus  have  the  purport  of  the  hope, 
what  is  hoped.  The  phrase  'the  creation  itself '"is  repeated  in  con- 
trast with  '  children  of  God.  To  attribute  such  a  hope  to  the  creation 
is  in  accordance  with  the  thought  of  the  entire  passage. — From  the 
bondage  of  corruption.  The  bondage  which  consists  in  corrup- 
tion. The  corruption  results  from  the  vanity  to  which  the  creation 
was  subjected;  it  is  borne  'not  of  its  own  will,'  and  hence  is  termed 
'  bondage.' — Into  the  liberty  of  the  glory  of  the  children  of 
God.  Not  only  delivered  from  bondage,  but  transferred  into  this  free- 
dom, which  consists  in,  or  at  least  results  fi'om,  a  share  in  the  glory  of 
the  children  of  God.  The  word  'glory'  is  prominent  and,  hence  the 
rendering  '  glorious  liberty  '  is  unfortunate.  The  '  glory '  is  that  spoken 
of  in  ver.  18,  it  will  appear  at  the  '  revealing  of  the  sons  of  God  '  (ver. 
19) ;  in  it  the  creation  delivered  from  corruption  will  share.  If  the 
reference  here  were  to  the  longings  of  heathen  humanity  alone,  and 
not  also  to  those  of  nature,  Paul  would  have  spoken  more  distinctly  of 
the  future  conversion  of  the  Gentiles» 


132  ROMANS  VIII.  [8:22,23. 

be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption  into  the 

22  liberty  of  the  glory  of  the  children  of  God.     For  we 
know  that  the  whole  creation  groaneth  and  travaileth 

23  in  pain  Hogether  until  now.     And  not  only  so,  but 

1  Or,  with  us. 

Ver.  22.  For  "we  know.  Here,  as  in  chaps.  2:  2;  3:  19;  7: 
14,  and  vers.  26,  28,  the  Apostle  appeals  to  the  consciousness  of 
Christians,  rather  than  (o  the  consciousness  of  all  men.  If  ver.  21  be 
taken  as  the  purport  ol'  the  hope,  then  this  is  a  proof  of  the  existence 
of  the  hope,  and  not  of  '  the  bondage  of  corruption.'  *  For  if  that  hope 
of  glorious  deliverance  had  not  been  left  to  it,  all  nature  would  not 
have  united  its  groaning  and  travailing  until  noic.  This  phenomenon, 
so  tmivcrsal  and  so  ^inbroken,  cannot  be  conducted  without  an  aim  ;  on 
the  contrary,  it  presupposes  as  the  motive  of  the  painful  travail  that 
very  hope,  toward  the  final  fulfilment  of  which  it  is  directed  '  (Meyer). — 
Groaneth.  The  word  'together'  qualifies  this  verb  also.  It  refers 
to  the  common  groaning  of  the  whole  creation,  and  the  marginal 
rendering,  'together  with  us'  suggests  an  idea  which  is  first  brought 
out  in  ver.  23. — Travaileth  in  pain  together.  The  reference  to 
birth-pangs  suggests  a  new  form  of  nature,  to  which  this  pain  is  the 
necessary  preliminary. — Until  now,  i.  e.,  the  present  moment;  the 
idea  of  unbroken  duration  is  the  prominent  one.  There  is  no  refer- 
ence to  some  point  of  time  in  the  future 

Ver.  23.  And  not  only  so.  Not  onlj'  is  this  true,  that  the  whole 
creation,  etc. — But  ourselves  also.  There  are  a  number  of  slight 
variations  in  the  Greek,  but  in  any  case  a  repetition  of  *  ourselves ' 
brings  out  the  correct  emphasis.  The  reference  is  to  Christians,  pos- 
sibly to  the  Christians  of  that  time  (see  below).  Even  Christians  who 
are  highly  privileged  unite  with  creation  in  its  groaning. — "Which 
have,  etc.  'Though  we  have,'  rather  than,  '  since  we  have.' — The 
first-fruits  of  the  Spirit.  '  First-fruits,'  as  a  pledge  of  a  full 
harvest.  Explanations:  (1.)  The  early  Christians  have  the  first-fruits 
of  the  Spirit ;  the  full  harvest  will  be  the  impartation  of  the  Sf'irit  to 
all  Christians;  (2.)  what  we  now  possess  is  but  'first-fruits'  the 
harvest  will  be  the  full  outpouring  in  the  future;  (3.)  the  first-fruits 
of  our  redemption  consist  in  the  possession  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  The 
reference  to  full  glorification  at  the  close  of  the  verse  makes  (2.) 
slightly  preferable;  (3.)  is  the  least  probable  view.— Even  we  our- 
selves groan  within  ourselves.  Though  we  have  the  first-fruits 
of  the  Spirit,  our  salvation  is  incomplete  :  the  groaning  is  internal  and 
intense. — Waiting  for  our  adoption.  'Awaiting  the  fulness  of 
our  adoption'  (Alford).  We  are  already  adopted  children  (vers.  14- 
17),  but  the  outward  condition  corresponding  to  this  new  relation  is 
not  yet  complete. — The  redemption  of  our  body.  The  redemp- 
tion is  not  complete  until  the  body  is  redeemed  :  then  we  shall  have 
the  full  blessing  of  adoption.     The  explanation  :  '  redemption  from  our 


8:24,25.]  ROMANS  VIII.  133 

ourselves  also,  which  have  the  firstfruits  of  the  Spirit, 
even  we  ourselves  groan  within  ourselves,  waiting  for 
our  adoption,   to  loit,  the  redemption   of  our  body. 

24  For  by*  hope  were  we  saved  :  but  hope  that  is  seen  is 
not  hope :  ^  for  wdio  ^  hopeth  for  that  which  he  seeth  ? 

25  But  if  we  hope  for  that  which  we  see  not,  then  do  Ave 
with  patience  wait  for  it. 

*  For  bj  read  in  (with  marg.  Or,  by). — Am.  Com. 
1  Many  ancient  authorities  read  for  what  a  man  seeth,  why  doth  he  yet  hope  fur? 
2  Some  ancient  authorities  read  awaiteth. 

body,'  IS  altogether  incorrect,  for  the  whole  current  of  thought  in  this 
chapter  places  emphasis  upon  the  glorification  of  the  body  at  the 
coming  of  Christ  (comp.  ver.  11).  The  mention  of  the  body  confirms 
the  view  of  '  creation '  which  refers  it  to  material  existences  also  ;  for 
the  groaning  in  ourselves  respects  that  part  of  our  being  which  is  most 
akin  to  the  material  creation. 

Ver.  24.  For  by  (in,  Am.  Com.)  hope.  '  lu'  is  greatly  to  be  pre- 
ferred, and  'for'  is  a  more  probable  sense  than  'by.'  The  fact  of  salvation 
placed  us  in  a  condition  of  which  hope  was  a  characteristic.  Luther : 
'  We  are  indeed  saved,  yet  in  hope.'  '  Inasmuch  as  the  object  of  sal- 
vation is  both  relatively  present  and  also  relatively  future,  hope  is  pro- 
duced from  faith  and  indissolubly  linked  with  it ;  for  faith  apprehends 
the  object,  in  so  far  as  it  is  present ;  hope,  in  so  far  as  it  is  still  fu- 
ture' (Philippi).— Were  we  saved.  The  tense  points  to  the  time  of 
conversion. — But  hope  that  is  seen,  etc.  By  these  self-evident 
statements  about  '  hope,'  the  Apostle  leads  his  readers  up  to  the 
thought  of  ver,  25,  which  is  both  an  encouragement  and  an  exhorta- 
tion.— For  -who  hopeth  for  that  -which  he  seeth?  There  is 
much  variety  in  the  Greek  manuscripts  here.  The  R.  V.  accepts  the 
briefest  reading,  supported  by  B  (first  hand)  and  one  other  authority. 
A  longer  reading  (see  margin)  is  accepted  by  Tischendorf,  while  the 
peculiar  form,  'awaiteth,'  is  found  in  Aleph  (first  hand).  A,  and  one 
other  authority.  The  critical  judgments  indicated  in  the  text  and 
margin  are  tliose  of  Westcott  and  Hort. 

Ver.  25.  With  patience  -wait  for  it.  Literally,  'through,'  but 
it  here  indicates  a  characteristic  of  the  waiting.  '  Patience,'  as  usual, 
suggests  the  notion  of  enduring  constancy.  Because  the  Christian 
hopes  for  a  glory  yet  to  be  revealed  (ver.  18),  he  awaits  it  persever- 
ingly,  which  even  the  creation  patiently  expects ;  his  patient  endur- 
ance of  the  present  sufi'erings  has  one  strong  motive  in  this  hope. 

Ver.  26.  And  in  like  manner  the  Spirit  also.  This  is  the 
second  ground  of  encouragement.  'In  like  manner'  introduces  that 
which  takes  place  at  the  same  time,  and  in  correspondence  with  what 
precedes  :  to  our  patient  human  waiting  is  added  the  help  of  the  Divine 
Spirit.     It  is  now  generally  conceded  that  the  personal  Holy  Spirit  is 


134  ROMANS  VIII.  [8:  26,27. 

26  And  in  like  manner  the  Spirit  also  lielpeth  our  in- 
firmity :  for  we  know  not  how  to  pray  as  we  ought ; 
but  the  Spirit  himself*  maketh   intercession   for  us 

27  with  groanings  which  cannot  be  uttered ;  and  he  that 

*  For  himslfrkud  itself. — Am.  Com. 

referred  to. — Helpeth  our  infirmity,  or,  *  weakness.'  The  best 
manuscripts  give  the  noun  in  the  singular  number.  The  verb  means 
'  to  lay  hold  of  in  connection  with  ' ;  the  Spirit  helps  our  weakness,  in 
bearing  the  burden  spoken  of  in  ver.  23,  in  awaiting  final  redemption. 
Tlie  reference  is  not  to  weakness  in  prayer  alone,  nor  is  our  weakness 
the  burden  which  the  Spirit  helps  us  bear.—  For  introduces  an  illus- 
tration of  our  weakness,  showing  how  the  Spirit  helps  us. — We 
knovr  not,  etc.  This  refers  to  our  continued  state  of  ignorance,  not 
to  special  seasons. — Hovw  to  pray  as  we  ought.  '  it  is  not  abso- 
lutely and  altogether  unknown  to  us  what  we  ought  to  ask,  but  only 
what  is  necessary  to  ask  according  to  the  given  circumstanc-s.' 
(Meyer). — But  the  Spirit  himself  (itself).  This  phrase  brings  into 
prominence  the  Holy  Spirit  as  the  Intercessor,  who  knows  '  what  we 
should  pray  for.' — Maketh  intercession  for  us.  The  phrase  an- 
swering to  '  for  us '  is  omitted,  according  to  the  best  authorities,  but 
the  verb  of  itself  implies  this.— With  groanings  -which  cannot 
be  uttered.  The  adjective  here  used  may  mean  (1.)  unutterable ; 
(2.)  unuttered ;  (3.)  not  speaking;  the  first  sense  is  much  to  be  pre- 
ferred. Care  should  be  taken  not  to  weaken  the  expressions  to  the 
unutterable  longings  of  the  human  spirit,  nor  on  the  other  hand  to 
refer  it  to  the  Holy  Spirit  independently  of  us.  The  Holy  Spirit  is 
here  spoken  of  in  His  saving  work  in  us :  while  dwelling  in  us  He 
makes  intercession  thus,  '  Himself  pleads  in  our  prayers,  raising  us  to 
higher  and  holier  desires  than  we  can  express  in  words,  whicn  can 
only  find  utterance  in  sighings  and  aspirations'  (Alford). 

Ver.  27.  But  he  that  searcheth  the  hearts.  Though  the 
groanings  are  unutterable,  God  understands  their  meaning.  The  Old 
Testament  frequently  by  language  of  this  kind  (1  Sam.  16:  7;  Ps.  7: 
10,  etc.),  describes  God  as  omniscient. — The  mind  of  the  Spirit. 
This  is  an  object  of  knowledge  to  the  heart-searching  God,  though  it 
may  be  but  partially  recognized  by  us  in  our  weakness. — Because, 
or,  '  that,'  etc.  The  word  may  have  either  sense ;  but  the  former  seems 
more  appropriate  here.  The  latter  makes  the  verse  quite  tame.  Some 
explain :  He  approves  what  is  the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  because,  etc. 
This  is  unnecessary.  The  ground  of  the  perfect  knowledge  is  the  fact 
that  He  maketh  intercession  (or,  '  pleadeth,'  a  slightly  difterent 
word  from  that  in  ver.  26)  for  the  saints  according  to  the  ■will 
of  God,  in  harmony  with  the  Divine  will.  Hence  what  we  cannot 
utter,  because  we  do  not  know  what  to  pray  for  as  we  ought,  what  the 
indwelling  Spirit  in  its  pleadings  cannot  articulately  utter  through  us, 
is  known  to  God,  because  in  accordance  with  His  will.     *In  short,  our 


8:  28.]  ROMANS  VIII.  135 

seareheth  the  hearts  knoweth  what  is  the  mind  of  the 
Spirit,  ^  because  he  maketh  intercession  for  the  saints 
28  according  to  the  will  of  God.  And  we  know  that  to 
them  that  love  God  ^all  things  work  together  for  good, 
even  to  them  that  are  called  according  to  his  purpose. 

1  Or,  that.       2  Some  ancient  authorities  read  God  workelh  all  things  with  them  for  good. 

own  yearnings,  resulting  as  they  do  from  the  presence  of  the  Spirit, 
are  themselves  a  pledge  of  their  own  realization'  (Beet). 

Vers.  28-39,  The  third  ground  of  encouragement ;  the  Christian 
has  nothing  to  fear,  for  nothing  can  separate  him  from  the  love  of 
God  (see  analysis  above).  AVeiss,  however,  finds  here  a  triumphant 
conclusion  of  the  whole  passage  (chaps.  6-8),  which,  hy  tracing  the 
certainly  of  salvation  to  its  deepest  ground,  the  Divine  foreordination, 
forms  a  transition  to  the  next  main  division  (chaps.  9-11). 

Ver.  28.  And  we  know.  Comp.  references  under  ver.  22.  Here 
the  context  unmistakably  indicates  that  this  is  an  expression  of  Chris- 
tian experience. — To  them  that  love  God.  In  emphatic  position 
in  the  original.  This  distinguishes  the  class  referred  to  ;  and  is  not 
in  itself  the  main  reason  of  their  security.  '  The  love  of  believers  for 
God  is  therefore  not  the  ground  of  their  confidence,  but  the  sign  and 
security  that  they  were  first  loved  of  God'  (Lange). — All  things. 
All  events,  even  afflictive  ones  (ver.  3'i),  indeed  all  created  things 
(vei-s.  38,  39).  Some  ancient  manuscripts  insert  '  God '  in  this  clause, 
giving  the  sense :  '  God  works  all  things  together,'  etc.  But  the  in- 
sertion can  readily  be  accounted  for ;  it  gives  a  correct  explanation  of 
what  is  here  implieJ,  and  the  word  'God'  would  naturally  be  taken 
from  the  context. — Work  together.  The  usual  sense :  cooperate, 
combine  to  produce  the  result,  is  preferable.  Others  explain  :  '  con- 
tribute,' 'help,'  work  together  with  Christians. — For  good.  For  their 
advantage,  including  their  eternal  welfare. — Even  to  them  that  are 
called.  This  is  not  equivalent  to  '  since  they  are  called,'  but  gives  a 
description  of  Christians  from  another  point  of  view  ;  '  as  being  those 
who  are  the  called.'  The  context  shows  that  the  call  has  been  ac- 
cepted, and  hence  that  this  is  not  a  general  expression  for  hearing  the 
invitations  of  the  gospel. — According  to  his  purpose.  The  call 
is  in  accordance  with  the  purpose  (comp.  vers.  29,  30) ;  the  former 
becomes  a  fact  we  can  perceive,  the  latter  we  cannot  perceive,  but  re- 
ceive as  a  fact,  for  all  things  cannot  work  together  for  good  to  them 
that  love  God,  unless  God  has  a  purpose,  with  which  what  occurs  ac- 
cords. It  should  be  remembered  that  to  limit  the  efficacy  of  His  pur- 
pose is  to  deny  freedom  to  Hira,  in  our  anxiety  to  maintain  cur  own 
freedom.  If  our  hearts  rest  on  Him,  in  hope  and  trust  and  love,  then 
we  know  that  in  order  thus  to  rest,  we  must  feel  that  He  is  infinitely 
free,  strong,  and  right,  as  well  as  loving.  The  difficulty  which  arises 
in  reconciling  God's  sovereignty  and   man's   free  will  cjnfronts  us 


136  ROMANS  VIII.  [8:  29. 

29  For  whom  he  foreknew,  he  also  foreordained   to  he 
conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son,  that  he  might  be 

whenever  we  accept  the  existence  of  a  Personal  God,  and  is  not  pecu- 
liar to  Christianity,  much  less  to  some  one  school  of  Christian  theology. 
Ver.  29.  This  verse  and  the  next  prove  the  statement  of  ver.  28, 
showing  how  the  calling  agrees  with  God's  purpose,  forming  part  of 
His  plan  ;  the  successive  steps  of  the  unfolding  of  this  purpose  are 
indicated,  up  to  the  certain  glorification  of  the  chosen  ones.  The 
whole  matter  is  stated  as  presenting  the  objective  ground  of  confidence 
of  believers.  The  other  side  is  not  touched  upon,  and  no  attempt  is 
made  to  solve  the  great  problem  of  reconciling  the  two.  Those  read 
aright  here,  who  seek  to  learn  for  their  comfort  what  God  has  done 
for  them  in  eternity.  How  He  did  these  successive  acts  is  bej^ond  our 
comprehension  ;  ivhi/  He  did  them  can  be  ansAvered  in  this  world  only 
by  the  responsive  love  of  the  believer's  heart.  But  precisely  because 
the  Apostle  is  pressing  the  objective,  divine  side  of  our  salvation,  we 
should  not  depart  from  the  obvious  sense  of  his  words  in  order  to  at- 
tempt to  accommodate  his  language  to  that  phase  of  the  subject  he  is 
not  discussing.  '  It  should  be  remembered  that  St.  Paul  is  not 
now  writing  in  the  calm  temper  of  philosophical  analysis,  but  in  an 
intense  access  of  religious  emotion,  and  therefore  he  does  not  stay  to 
put  in  all  the  qualifying  clauses  that  philosophy  might  require.  It  is 
well  for  mankind  that  he  has  done  so.  In  all  great  and  creative  reli- 
gious minds  the  consciousness  of  free  will  has  retired  into  the  back- 
ground'  (Sanday). — Whom  he  foreknew,  he  also  foreor- 
dained. '  Predestinated  '  is  quite  accurate,  but  '  foreordained ' 
preserves  the  correspondence  with  the  previous  verb  which  is  found 
in  the  Greek.  God  knew  beforehand  certain  individuals  of  our  race, 
and  those  He  destined  beforehand,  etc.  The  foreknowledge  precedes 
the  foreordaining,  is  its  ground  as  it  were  i  although  strictly  speaking, 
there  is  no  before  nor  after  to  the  eternal  God).  Hence  we  must  not 
confound  the  two,  nor  apply  them  to  other  than  the  same  individuals  ; 
nor  should  we  depart  from  the  obvious  sense  of  '  foreknew '  by  ex- 
plaining it  as  meaning  'approve'  (introducing  the  idea  of  foreseen 
faith,  as  though  this  were  the  moving  cause  of  God's  foreordaining 
some  to  salvation).  Such  a  thought  is,  moreover,  entirely  foreign  in 
the  context.  Of  course,  the  foreknowledge  differs  from  God's  '  pre- 
science of  which  all  men  and  all  events  are  the  objects'  (Hodge),  but 
it  does  not  of  itself  include  the  idea  of  selection,  though  closely  con- 
nected with  it  here.  The  beginning  of  the  whole  plan  is  in  the  good 
pleasure  of  God :  He  foreknew  certain  persons  as  those  whom  He 
would  destine  unto  salvation,  and  those  he  foreordained.  That  they 
would  believe  is  also  included  in  His  plan,  but  it  is  precisely  this  sub- 
jective ground  of  salvation  Avhich  the  Apostle  does  not  even  name  in 
this  entire  section. — To  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son. 
Some  limit  this  to  conformity  to  Christ  in  having  a  glorified  body,  but 
the  whole  context  favors  a  wider  reference  to  '  that  entire  form,  of 


8:30,31.]  ROM A.NS  VIII.  137 

30  the  firstborn  among  many  brethren :  and  Avhom  he  fore- 
ordained, them  he  also  called  :  and  whom  he  called, 
them  he  also  justified  :  and  whom  he  justified,  them  he 
also  ijlorified. 

31  What  then  shall  we  say  to  these  things?     If  God 

glorification  in  body  and  sanctifi cation  in  spirit,  of  which  Christ  is 
the  perfect  pattern,  and  all  His  people  shall  be  partakers'  (xVlford). 
Some  include  the  present  partaking  in  His  sufferings  and  moral  cha- 
racter. While  this  may  be  implied  (for  the  thought  of  suffering  is  not 
remote,  vers.  18,  31,  etc.),  it  must  not  be  made  the  main  idea.  Pre- 
destination is  more  than  predestination  to  holiness  through  suffering ; 
though  attempts  have  been  made  to  represent  this  as  the  only  predes- 
tination that  is  defensible. — That  he  might  be.  The  final  purpose 
of  the  predestination,  is  concerning  Christ ;  comp.  Eph.  1 :  4,  5. — 
The  first-born  among  many  brethren.  First,  in  order  of  time, 
as  well  as  chief  in  rank;  comp.  Col.  1:  15.  The  purpose  of  grace 
began  in  Him,  even  as  His  glory  is  its  end.  Some  place  the  emphasis 
upon  'first-born' ;  others  upon  'many  brethren'  ;  but  because  the  end 
of  the  foreknowledge  and  foreordaining  is  the  glory  of  Christ  in  His 
people,  equal  emphasis  rests  on  both  :  nothing  can  separate  the  first- 
born and  His  many  brethren. 

Ver.  30.  Them  he  also  called.  This  certainly  means  more 
than  the  general  invitation  to  believe  and  accept  the  gospel,  since  the 
series  of  gracious  acts  here  announced  does  not  include  all  who  are 
thus  invited.  The  call  is  effectual,  is  inseparably  linked  with  predes- 
tination and  justification  in  the  unfolding  of  God's  gracious  purpose. 
But  the  term  is  not  identical  with  'effectually  called,'  for  the  latter 
phrase  emphasizes  those  subjective  aspects  which  are  left  out  of  view 
here.  The  Apostle  is  not  detailing  our  experience,  but  the  acts  of  God 
which  secure  our  salvation. — Them  he  also  justified.  Here,  as 
elsewhere,  accounted  righteous.  Only  those  who  believe  are  justified, 
but  as  throughout  the  subjective  side  is  not  presented.  The  whole 
passage  is  for  the  comfort  of  those  who  believe. — Them  he  also 
glorified.  Not  'them  He  also  sanctified,'  which  we  might  have  ex- 
pected. This  would  turn  our  thoughts  upon  ourselves,  disturbing 
the  rhetorical  climax  quite  as  much  as  it  weakened  the  sense  of  secu- 
rity in  God's  grace,  which  it  is  the  Apostle's  design  to  strengthen. 
Moreover,  the  past  tense  is  chosen  to  present  the  matter  as  necessary 
and  certain,  so  much  so  that  it  can  be  spoken  of  as  already  accom- 
plished. While  we  may  include  here  successive  steps  by  which  be- 
lievers are  led  to  their  final  and  complete  glorification,  that  end  is  the 
prominent  thought,  and  the  certainty  of  its  accomplishment  gives  the 
triumphant  tone  to  what  follows. 

Ver.  31.  What  then  shall  we  say?  In  chaps.  3:  5;  4:  1; 
7  :  7  ;  9 :  14,  this  form  introduces  an  inference  which  the  Apostle  op- 
poses ;  here  and  in  chap.  9:  30,  one  he  accepts. — These    things; 


138  ROMANS  VIII.  [8:  32,  33. 

32  is  for  us,  who  is  against  us  ?     He  that  spared  not  his 
own  Son,  but  delivered  him  up  for  us  all,  how  shall  he 

33  not  also  with  him  freely  give  us  all  things  ?     Who 

i.  e.,  set  forth  in  vers.  29,  30.  "What  we  should  say  is  to  echo  the 
language  of  the  rest  of  the  chapter,  which  presents  in  glowing  lan- 
guage the  certainty  of  salvation  as  based  upon  the  acts  of  God's  love 
in  the  facts  of  redemption. — If  God  is  for  us,  -who  is  against 
us  ?  This  rendering  is  more  literal.  That  God  is  for  us,  has  already 
been  shown  (vers.  29,  30) ;  there  is  but  one  answer.  But  it  is  easier 
to  accept  the  logic  and  admire  the  rhetoric  of  the  passage,  tlian  to 
take  the  proper  encouragement  from  it, 

Ver.  32.  He  that,  etc.  This  is  an  answer  to  the  question  of  ver. 
31  ;  but  as  the  great  historical  facts  of  the  gospel  now  come  into 
view,  there  is  an  advance  in  thought.  The  peculiar  form  of  the  origi- 
nal might  be  paraphrased:  He  who  even,  or,  indeed. —  Spared  not. 
The  negative  side  of  what  is  positively  stated  in  the  next  clause. — 
His  o"wn  Son.  This  points  to  the  only  begotten  Son  (comp.  ver.  3, 
where  a  similar  expression  occurs),  to  give  emphasis  to  the  display  of 
love.  Some  find  a  contract  to  adopted  sons,  but  this  is  not  necessarily 
involved. — Delivered  him  up.  The  entire  humiliation  may  he  in- 
cluded, but  the  special  reference  to  death  is  obvious;  comp.  chap.  4: 
25. —  For  us  all;  all  believers,  since  this  class  is  referred  to  through- 
out. On  the  phrase,  comp.  chap.  5 :  6-8. — How  shall  he  not.  etc. 
An  argument  from  the  greater  to  the  less  ;  comp.  chap.  v.  9-10. — 
Also  with  him.  'Also'  is  probably  to  be  joined  with  the  verb,  but 
in  any  case  the  fict  that  the  gift  of  Christ  to  us,  forms  the  basis  of  the 
conclusion. — Freely  give  us  all  things.  Give  as  a  matter  of  grace 
or  favor,  all  those  things  already  indicated  in  vers  2G-30,  everything 
created  that  can  work  for  good  tons  as  those  who  are  not  the  objects 
of  the  love  of  God  in  Christ.  This  is  the  middle  term  which  binds  the 
two  sides  presented  in  ver.  28:  'those  who  love  God;'  'thai  are  the 
called  according  to  his  purpose.' 

Vers.  33-35.  The  main  point  open  to  discussion  is  respecting  the 
punctuation  of  these  verses.  (1.)  The  A.  V.  gives  answers  as  well  as 
questions  in  vers.  33,  34.  (2.)  Others  find  two  questions  in  each  of 
these  verses  ;  so  Augustine  and  many  ancient  and  modern  commenta- 
tors. (3.)  Meyer  joins  together  the  latter  part  of  vers.  33,  34,  with 
the  first  clause  of  vers.  34,  35  respectively:  'Who  shall  lay  anything 
to  the  charge  of  God's  elect?  It  is  God  that  justifieth  ;  who  shall 
condemn?  Christ  (Jesus)  is  He  that  died,  etc.,  who  also  maketh  in- 
tercession for  us  ;  who  shall  separate  us  from  the  love  of  Christ  ?  ' 
(4.)  The  R.  V.  accepts  a  somewhat  modified  form  of  Meyer's  view  in 
this  text,  and  gives  (2.^*  a  place  in  the  margin. 

Ver.  33.  Who  shall  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of.  Tlit 
term  used  is  a  legal  one,  and  suggests  an  accusation  resulting  in  con- 
demnation.— God's  elect.  Those  referred  to  throughout,  especiallj? 
in  vers.  28-30,  thus  designated  to  confirm  the  security  of  believers 


8:34,35.]  ROMANS  VIU.  139 


34  shall  lay  any  thing  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect?  ^It 
is  God  that  justilieth ;  who  is  he  that  shall  condemn?* 
^  It  is  Christ  Jesus  that  died,  yea  rather,  that  was  raised 
from  the  dead,  who  is  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  who 

35  also  maketh  intercession  for  us.     Who  shall  separate 

1  Or,  Sliall  God  thatjustifieth  f  2  Or,  Shall  Christ  Jesus  that  died,  .   .    .  tis  f 

*  For  shall  condemn  read  condemneth. — Am.  Com. 

Only  believers  can  with  any  propriety  find  comfort  in  the  thought,  and 
even  they  should  be  careful  not  to  rest  their  faith  upon  a  decree  of 
election  rather  than  the  personal  Saviour. — It  is  God  that  justi- 
fieth,  or,  "God  is  the  justifier.'  If  the  common  punctuation  be  ac- 
cepted, this  is  the  proof  that  no  one  can  successfully  accuse.  If  taken 
as  a  question,  it  is  only  a  more  rhetorical  form  of  the  same  proof: 
'Shall  God  who  justifieth  ?  '  The  R.  V.,  however,  makes  it  the  basis 
of  the  statement  of  ver.  34  :  since  it  is  God  that  justifieth,  who  is  he 
that  condemneth  ? 

Ver.  34.  Who  is  he  that  shall  condemn  (condemneth  )  ?  The 
Am.  Com.  accept  the  more  grammatical  rendering. — It  is  Christ  Jesus. 
The  weight  of  evidence  apparently  favors  the  insertion  of  '  Jesus.' 
We  may  paraphrase  :  '  Christ  Jesus  is  the  one  who  died,'  etc. — Died, 
etc.  The  four  great  saving  facts  about  Christ  Jesus  are  here  mentioned 
in  order :  His  death,  resurrection,  ascension,  and  continued  interces- 
sion. The  usual  view  presents  these  facts  as  a  proof  that  Christ  will 
not  condemn  us.  (The  interrogative  form  would  be :  Shall  Christ 
Jesus  who  died,  etc.)  It  is  better  to  regard  this  verse  as  the  basis  of 
the  question  of  ver.  35,  proving  that  nothing  can  separate  us  from  His 
love, — Yea  rather.  Not  His  death  alone,  but  His  death  followed  by 
His  resurrection  gives  security. — Was  raised  from  the  dead.  The 
latter  phrase  is  well  sustained,  and  there  is  about  the  same  amount  of 
evidence  against  inserting  '  even'  before  'at  the  right  hand  of  God,' 
— Maketh  intercession,  or,  'pleadeth,'  as  in  ver.  27.  To  the 
three  great  past  facts  is  added  one  which  is  present  and  abiding,. 
Comp.  Heb.  7  :  25;  9  :  24  ;  1  John  2  :  1.  The  fact  is  undoubted,  and 
its  pertinence  in  the  Apostle's  argument  obvious,  whatever  view  be 
taken  of  the  connection. 

Ver.  35.  Who  shall  separate  us  from  the  love  of  Christ  ? 
(The  marginal  reading,  found  in  the  two  oldest  manuscripts,  is  pro- 
bably due  to  the  influence  of  ver.  39,  since  B.  adds  here:  '  which  is  in 
Christ  Jesus.')  Christ's  love  to  us,  rather  than  our  love  to  Him,  or 
even  our  sense  of  His  love  to  us.  Still  the  separation  must  refer  to 
possible  hindrances  in  its  gracious  eflFects  upon  us  ;  hence  the  sepa- 
ration would  include  a  failure  to  feel  His  love  to  us.  If  we  connect 
the  question  with  ver.  34,  we  may  paraphrase  thus  :  '  Christ  Jesus  is 
the  very  one  who  died  to  atone  for  our  sins  ;  yes,  more  than  this,  He 
is  the  one  who  was  raised  from  the  dead  for  our  justification  (chap.  4: 
25)  ;  it  is  He  who  sits  at  the  place  of  power  lovingly  ruling  the  world 


140  ROMANS  VIII.  [8 !  36-38. 

US  from  the  love  ^of  Christ?  shall  tribulation,  or  an- 
guish, or  persecution,  or  famine,  or  nakedness,  or  peril, 

36  or  sword  ?     Even  as  it  is  written. 

For  thy  sake  we  are  killed  all  the  day  long ; 
We  were  accounted  as  sheep  for  the  slaughter. 

37  Nay,  in  all  these  things  we  are  more  than  conquerors 

38  through  him  that  loved  us.     For  I  am  persuaded,  that 
neither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels,  nor  principalities, 

1  Some  ancient  authorities  read  of  God. 

for  our  sake;  He  it  is  who  is  pieading  on  our  behalf;  how  then  can 
any  one,  or  anything,  separate  us  from  His  love?'  The  questions 
which  follow  suggest  what  might  seem  to  threaten  such  separation. — 
Tribulation,  or  anguish,  as  in  chap.  2:9;  the  former  referring  to 
outward  trial,  the  latter  to  the  inward  sense  of  it.  '  First  of  all  be- 
lievers are  pressed  into  anxiety  by  the  world.  Then  there  comes  per- 
secution itself,  which  drives  them  out  to  famine  and  nakedness  ; 
the  end  is  peril,  the  danger  of  death,  and  sword,  death  itself.' 
(Lange).  There  seems  to  some  such  climax.  In  those  days  these 
very  things  threatened;  in  our  day  the  dangers  are  different,  but 
none  the  less  real  and  quite  as  often  disturbing  our  sense  of  Christ's 
love  to  us. 

Ver.  36.  Even  as  it  is  -written.  From  Ps.  44 :  22,  quite  ex- 
actly in  the  words  of  the  LXX.  The  whole  Psalm  refers  to  the  sutfer- 
ings  of  God's  people,  and  the  verse,  even  if  not  directly  prophetic,  is 
typical  of  the  treatment  the  world  bestows  on  God's  children.  The 
special  point  proven  by  the  quotation  is  the  danger  of  the  '  sword,' 
since  to  this  extremity  persecution  had  gone  in  the  case  of  the  saints 
of  old. — We  -were  accounted,  etc.  Because  thus  reckoned  as  sheep 
destined  for  slaughter,  they  were  killed  all  the  day  long. 

Ver.  37.  Nay  ;  literally,  '  but.'  Some  connect  this  with  ver.  35, 
making  ver.  36  parenthetical,  but  this  is  not  necessary,  for  the  course 
of  thought  is  unbroken,  and  this  verse  is  antithetical  to  both  vers.  35, 
and  36. — In  all  these  things  ;  just  mentioned. — We  are  more 
than  conquerors.  A  single  word  in  the  Greek  :  '  over-conquer  ; ' 
we  are  over-victorious.  This  tone  of  triumph  is  not  selfish,  for  the 
abounding  victory  is  through  him  that  loved  us.  That  the  refer- 
ence is  to  Christ,  appears  from  the  context  ver.  35  (conip.  ver.  39)  ; 
from  the  tense  used,  which  points  to  one  crowning  act  of  love  (comp. 
chap.  5:6;  Gal.  2  :  20),  His  death  on  the  cross.  Since  His  love  con- 
quered death  ;  even  in  death  we  cannot  be  separated  from  His  love, 
but  are  more  than  conquerors. 

Ver.  38.  For  I  am  persuaded.  In  thus  expressing  his  own 
triumphant  conviction,  the  Apostle  not  only  sums  up  what  precedes, 
but  goes  further.  The  list  here  given  exceeds  the  previous  one ;  not 
only  so,  but  to  the  great  facts  of  God's  purpose,  and  the  gracious  facts 


8:  39.]  ROMANS  VIII.  141 

nor  things  present,  nor  things  to  come,  nor  powers,  nor 
39  height,   nor  depth,  nor  any  other   ^creature,  shall  be 
able  to  separate  us  from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in 
Christ  Jesus  our  Lord. 

1  Or,  creation. 

of  Christ's  work,  there  is  added  the  subjective  side,  the  personal  con- 
fidence of  the  Apostle  himself. — Neither  death,  nor  life.  'Death' 
is  named  first,  probably  because  of  the  reference  in  ver.  36,  and  the 
natural  antithesis  is  '  life.'  Dying  or  living,  we  are  the  objects  of  this 
love.  It  is  altogether  incorrect  to  explain  :  '  neither  anj'thing  dead 
nor  anything  living.' — Nor  angels,  nor  principalities.  This 
second  pair  refers  to  anscelic  beings  ;  the  latter  term  to  a  higher  order. 
Comp.  Eph.  1:21;  6  :  12 ;  Col.  1  :  16  ;  2  :  15.  The  insertion  at  this 
point  of  the  phrase  'nor  powers,'  which  should  be  placed  at  the  close 
of  the  verse,  shows  that  the  early  transcribers  so  understood  the  pas- 
sage. But  it  is  difficult  to  determine  whether  we  should  understand 
good  angels,  or  bad,  or  both.  To  refer  the  one  term  to  the  former,  and 
the  other  to  the  latter,  is  both  abrupt  and  arbitrary ;  to  leave  the  evil 
spirits  unnoticed  in  such  a  catalogue  would  seem  strange.  Hence,  we 
may  refer  both  terms  to  both  classes,  in  the  wide  hypothesis  the 
Apostle  here  conceives.  —  Nor  things  present,  nor  things  to 
come,  nor  powers.  Instead  of  continuing  the  arrangement  by 
pairs,  the  Apostle  now  gives  two  sets  in  thrr'es,  '  in  such  a  way,  that  to 
the  two  which  stand  contrasted,  he  adds  a  third  of  a  general  character' 
(Meyer).  The  first  and  second  terms  point  to  vicissitudes  of  time,  the 
third  to  earthly  powers  of  any  kind.  This  seems  to  be  the  only  sense 
of  '  powers'  that  is  in  accordance  with  the  position  assigned  it  by 
the  best  authorities. 

Ver.  39.  Nor  height,  nor  depth.  The  idea  of  space  is  now 
substituted  for  that  of  time  ;  but  it  is  difficult  to  define  the  exact  refer- 
ence. The  most  jDrobable  one  is  :  heaven  and  hell ;  though  heaven 
and  earth,  happiness  and  unhappiness,  honor  and  shame,  lofty  and 
lowly,  have  been  suggested.  It  is  doubtful  whether  any  specific  defini- 
tion is  required. — Nor  any  other  creature.  Whatever  created 
being  has  not  been  previously  included,  is  included  here.  1  he  phrase 
seems  to  sum  up  rather  than  merely  to  supplement  what  precedes. — 
The  love  of  God,  -which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.  This  is 
not  to  be  distinguished  from  'the  love  of  Christ'  (ver.  35),  since  it  is 
rather  a  fuller  statement  of  the  same  love.  '  God  is  the  original  fount- 
ain, Christ  the  constant  organ  and  mediating  channel  of  one  and  the 
same  love ;  so  that  in  Christ  is  the  love  of  God,  and  the  love  of  God  is 
the  love  of  God  in  Christ '  (Meyer).  Since  God  is  above  every  created 
thing,  since  this  love  is  ours,  this  completes  the  demonstration  of  the 
security  of  the  believer.  With  this  triumphant  expression  the  Apostle 
closes  his  exposition  of  the  main  theme  :  the  gospel  is  to  every  one 
that  believeth  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation :  this  it  could  not  be  if 


142  ROMANS  IX.  [9:  1. 

Chaptek  9  :  1-5. 

Expression  of  Deep  Sorrow  for  the  Unbelief  of  the  Jews. 
1      I  say  the  truth  in  Christ,  I  lie  not,  my  conscience 

anything  could   separate  us  from  the  love  of  God  which  is  in  Christ 
Jesus  our  Lord.    Erasmus :  '  Cicero  never  said  anything  more  eloquent.' 

Chapters  9-11. 

IV.  The  Universality    of    this  Salvation,  and   the    Historical 
Order  of  its  Application. 

The  gospel  is  God's  power  unto  salvation,  to  the  Jew  first,  and  also  to  the  GenH'e 
(chap.  1 :  16).  The  unbelief  of  the  Jews  seemed  to  invalidate  the  Apostle's  state- 
ment respecting  the  universality  of  this  salvation,  and  he  therefore  discusses  the 
question  which  lay  so  close  to  his  own  heart.  This  of  itself  would  account  for  these 
chapters;  but  it  is  also  true  that  every  one  of  his  readers  irrespective  of  any  sup- 
posed conflict  between  Jewish  and  Gentile  Christians,  would  be  profoundly  interested 
in  the  matter.  Ever  since,  Christian  people  have  been  interested  in  it,  both  as  belong- 
ing to  the  historical  course  of  the  developmei  t  of  the  kiugbom  of  God,  and  as  one  of 
the  darkest  mysteries  of  Gods  dealings  with  men.  So  lung  as  the  mass  of  the  Jews 
reject  the  Lord  Jesus  as  the  Messiah,  the  mystery  will  remain  unsolved,  except  as 
these  chapters  present  a  solution.  It  seems  idle,  therefore,  to  build  up  a  baseless 
theory  about  the  internal  condition  of  the  Eoman  congregation,  to  account  for  this 
portion  of  the  Epistle  (comp.  Introduction). 

On  the  other  hand,  this  natural  view  of  the  passage  helps  the  reader  to  avoid  the 
false  notion  that  the  Apostle  here  treats  of  Divine  sovereignty  in  an  abstract  manner.- 
He  writ 's,  not  in  a  cold,  metaphysical  tone,  but  with  a  pathos  at  times  almost  tragical  ' 
(comp.  chap.  9 :  3) ;  Luther,  therefore,  well  says  of  these  chapters  as  related  to  what 
precedes:  '  Who  hath  not  known  passion,  cros.-s,  and  travail  of  death,  cannot  treat  of 
knowledge  (election  of  grace),  without  injury  and  inward  enmity  toward  God. 
Wherefore  take  heed  that  thou  drink  not  wine,  while  thou  art  yet  a  sucking  babe. 
Each  several  doctrine  hath  its  own  season,  and  measure,  and  age.' 

An.vlysis  :  1.  Chap.  9  :  1-29  :  Goo's  Sovereignty  :  His  promise  is  not  void. 

1.  E.rp  -ession  of  deep  sorrow  at  the  fact  of  the  exclusion  of  so  many  of  his  people, 
God's  covenant  people,  from  salvation  in  Christ ;  chap  9 :  1-5. 

1 1.  But  t)m  does  not  render  God's  promise  void ;  chap.  9 :  6-29.  For  (a.)  that  promise 
was  made  of  free  grace,  only  to  the  chosen  ones,  as  illustrated  in  the  case  of  Isaac 
and  Jacob  (vers.  6-13) ;  (b.)  In  this  election  God  is  not  unjust,  for  He  has  a  right  to 
choose,  being  sovereign  (vers.  14-29). 

2.  Chaps- 9:  30-lf>:  21:  JIan's  Respoxsibilitt  :  The  Jews  were  excluded  on  the 
ground  of  their  oicn  unbelief. 

I.  The  fact  that  the  Jews  rejected  the  way  of  faith  :  chap.  9 :  30-33. 

I I.  The  proof  that  this  was  the  one  way  of  salvation  ;  hence  the  unbelieving  Jews 
themselves  responsible  ;  chap.  10:  1-21. 


9:1.]  ROMANS  IX.  143 

3.  Chap.  11.  The  Prospective  Solution  :  But  God  has  not  cast  off  His  people  for- 
ever. 

I.  The  rejectioTi  of  Israel  is  not  total ;  a  remnant,  elected  of  grace,  will  be  saved 
(vers.  1-10). 

II.  It  is  not  fiwil;  the  unbelief  and  fall  of  Israel  turns  out  for  the  salvation  and 
reviving  of  the  Gentiles,  who,  however,  should  not  boast  (vers.  11-21) ;  since  the  re- 
jection is  only  temporary,  ultimately  Israel  will  be  saved  (vers.  25-32). 

In  conclusion,  the  Apostle  breaks  forth  into  a  doxology  to  the  grace  and  wisdom  oj 
God,  who  will  thus  solve  the  enigma  of  the  world's  history,  and  lead  all  things  to  the 
glory  of  His  name  and  the  best  interests  of  His  kingdom  (vers.  33-36). 

Chapter  9 :  1-29. 

1.  God's  Sovereignty  :     His  Promts    is  not  Void. 

I.  Deep  Sorrow  of  the -Apostle  for  the  Unbelief  of  the  J^ews,  his  Brethren, 
and  God's  Covenant  People,  from  whom  the  Messiah  came,  vers.  1-5. 

The  pathos  of  the  partially  apologetic  opening  of  this  division  of  the  Epistle  is  so 
great,  that  it  has  survived  the  interminable  discussions  which  have  been  called  forth 
by  vers.  3  and  5.  Probably  he  will  interpret  both  passages  most  nearly  aright  who 
approaches  them  with  the  most  vivid  apprehension  of  the  Apostle's  feelings  ;  it  is  'a 
fervent  outburst  of  Israelitish  patriotism,  the  more  sorrowful  by  contrast  with  the 
blessedness  of  the  Christim  previously  extolled  and  so  deeply  experienced  by  the 
Apostle  himself  (Meyer).  The  language  is  that  of  sorrowful  sympathy,  deprecatory 
in  tone,  '  to  take  at  once  the  ground  from  those  who  might  charge  him.  in  the  con- 
duct of  his  argument,  with  hostility  to  his  own  alienated  people  '  (Alford). 

Ver.  1.  I  say  the  truth  in  Christ.  The  asseveration  of  the 
Apostle  is  three-fold,  ami  is  introduced  abruptly,  without  a  conjunc- 
tion, in  accordance  with  the  feeling  which  prompts  it.  'In  Christ' 
is  not  an  adjuration  (the  form  of  an  oath  in  Greek  would  be  entirely 
different),  but  means,  in  fellowship  with  Christ,  the  element  in  which 
he  live;^.  Such  fellowship  with  Him  who  is  the  Truth  implies  the 
sincerity  of  one  who  enjoys  it. — I  lie  not.  This  negative  form  of 
asseveration  is  a  rhetorical  strengthening  of  the  previous  expression. 
—  My  conscience  also  bearing  -witness  -with  me,  or,  'my 
conscience  also  bearing  me  witness.'  The  latter  explanation  is  pre- 
ferable :  lie  does  not  lie,  for  his  conscience,  which  would  convict  him 
of  falsehood,  gives  testimony  to  him  in  accordance  with  what  he  is 
about  to  state.  The  other  explanation  points  to  a  joint  testimony; 
but  his  conscience  and  himself  could  not  be  joint  witnesses  to  the 
Romans. — In  the  Holy  Ghost.  To  be  joined  with  'bearing  wit- 
ness,' not  with  'my  conscience.'  His  conscience  is,  indeed,  governed 
by  the  Holy  Spirit ;  but  in  what  he  is  about  to  say,  he  cannot  lie,  for 
the  testimony  his  conscience  bears  is  'in  the  Holy  Ghost.'  Notice  the 
symmetry:  He  speaks  the  truth,  in  fellowship  with  Christ;  he  djes 
not  lie,  for  his  conscience  bears  testimony  in  the  Holy  Spirit. 


144  ROMANS  IX.  [9 :  2,  3. 

2  bearino;  ^vitness  with  me  in  the  Holv  Ghost,  that  I 
have  great  sorrow  and  unceasing  pain  m  my  heart. 

3  For  I  could  ^vish  that  I  myself  were  anathema  from 
Christ  for  my  brethren's  sake,  my  kinsmen  according 

1  Or,  praij. 

Ver.  2.  Great  sorrovr  and  unceasing  pain.  The  cause  of  this 
•grief  obviously  is  the  unbelief  of  his  countrymen,  their  practical  ex- 
clusion from  the  Messianic  salvation.  This  feeling  was  respecting 
those  who  had  for  years  persecuted  him  with  relentless  hatred,  and 
who,  shortly  after  this  time  occasioned  him  a  long  imprisonment,  thus 
becoming  the  immediate  cause  of  his  martyrdom. 

Ver.  3.  For  I  could  wish  that  I  myself,  etc.  The  order  of 
the  better  established  reading  makes  the  word  ■  anathema '  more 
emphatic,  and  forbids  our  taking  '  I  myself  as  the  subject  of 
'could  wish,'  which  was  grammatically  possible  with  the  order  of  the 
common  reading.  The  Greek  verb  rendered  '  could  wish '  is  in  the 
imperfect  tense,  and  might  mean  'was  wishing;'  but  the  same  tense 
is  constantly  used  of  what  is  termed  'arrested  action.'  The  latter 
sense  is  preferable  here.  (1.)  The  other  view  would  seem  to  require 
'I  myself  as  subject  of  'was  wishing.'  (2.)  The  reference  to  the 
past  makes  an  anti-climax,  or  at  best  a  common-place  sense :  if  the 
past  wish  were  before  his  conversion,  referring  to  his  blind  zeal  for 
Israel  against  Christ,  then  the  terms  are  strangely  chosen  to  express 
that  sense ;  to  explain  the  wish  as  a  past  one,  but  occurring  since  his 
conversion,  is  open  to  all  the  objections  that  are  urged  against  the 
common  view,  without  having  the  same  reasons  in  its  favor.  We 
therefore  accept  the  obvious  meaning :  '  I  could  wish  that  I  myself 
were  devoted  to  destruction  from  Christ  for  the  sake  of  my  brethren,' 
etc.  The  implication  is  that  the  wish  W{>s  not  formed,  either  because 
it  was  impossible  thus  to  wish,  or,  because  the  wish  could  not  be  ful- 
filled, or,  both.  The  Apostle,  however,  is  not  using  a  hyperbole,  nor 
is  his  language  a  senseless  straining  of  the  idea  of  self-denial.  The 
objective  impossibility  did  not  destroy  or  diminish  the  subjective  in- 
tensity of  PauVs  feeling,  which  thus  seeks  expression.  This  feeling, 
too,  is  most  akin  to  the  self-sacrificing  love  of  the  Lord  he  preached. 
Comp.  the  language  of  Moses  (Ex.  32:  32).  There  is  no  wish  to  be 
separated  from  the  holy  will  of  Christ — which  would  be  wicked— but 
only  from  the  enjoyment  of  Christ,  temporarily,  as  Christ  Himself,  on 
the  cross,  was  separated  from  the  enjoyment  of  His  Father's  presence, 
when  He  cried:  'My  God,  my  God.  why  hast  Thou  forsaken  Me?' 
And  it  detracts  nothing  from  our  estimate  of  his  affection  to  know,  as 
he  did,  that  the  very  feeling  he  expresses  was  the  result'  of  Christ's 
love  to  him,  and  would  be  impossible  were  he  sundered  from  fellow- 
ship with  Christ.  '  It  is  the  expression  of  an  affectionate  and  self- 
denying  heart,  willing  to  surrender  all  things — even,  if  it  might  be  so, 
eternal  glory  itself — if  thereby  he  could  obfain  for  his  beloved  people 


9:  4.]  ROMANS  IX.  •  145 

4  to  the  flesh  :  who  are  Israelites ;  whose  is  the  adop- 
tion, and  the  glory,  and  the  covenants,  and  the  giving. 

those  blessings  of  the  gospel  which  he  now  enjoyed,  but  from  which 
they  were  excluded.  Others  express  their  love  by  professing  them- 
selves ready  to  give  their  life  for  their  friends  :  he  declares  the  inten- 
sity of  his  affection  by  reckoning  even  his  spiritual  life  not  too  great 
a  price,  if  it  might  purchase  their  salvation'  (Alford).  It  is  not  im- 
plied that  this  is  the  constant  and  conscious  state  of  every  Christian, 
still  less  that  our  salvation  depends  upon  our  attaining  to  such  a 
height  of  disinterested  affection.  —  Anathema.  This  Avord,  which 
occurs  several  times  in  the  New  Testament,  as  well  as  in  the  Septua- 
gint,  is  the  Hellenistic  form  of  a  word,  orip;inally  meaning  '  dedicated 
to  God.'  But  as  a  rule,  this  form  in  the  Bible  denotes  something 
dedicated  to  God  in  a  bad  sense.  In  the  New  Testament  the  word 
has  the  uniform  sense  of  '  having  become  obnoxious  to  the  wrath  or 
curse  of  God.'  Efforts  have  been  made  to  prove  that  'anathema,'  in 
the  time  of  Paul,  meant  only  '.Jewish  excommunication.'  Others  have 
explained  it  of  banishment  from  church  fellowship  ;  some,  of  temporal 
death.  But  the  idea  of  excommunication  was  first  attached  to  this 
term  in  later  times,  and  this  sense  is  altogether  inappropriate  in  the 
other  New  Testament  passages  where  the  word  occurs,  and  to  our  mind 
un.satisfactory  here  also.  The  notion  of  '  temporal  death '  is  entirely 
foreign  to  usage.  These  remarks  hold  good  in  regard  to  the  corres- 
ponding verb,  which  is  found  several  times  in  the  New  Testament. 
Wieseler,  after  a  full  investigation  (see his  Galatians,  1:8;  comp.  Lange, 
Romans,  pp.  302-304),  says:  'Anathema,  in  entire  congruity  with  the 
Old  Testament  cherem,  is  used  of  a,  persowwho  is  dedicated  to  God,  sub- 
jected to  the  Divine  curse  for  his  death,  not,  however,  to  bodily  death, 
as  in  the  more  ancient  formula  (this  reference,  however,  being  not 
necessarily  contained  in  the  root,  but  resulting  only  from  the  histori- 
cal relations  of  the  Jews  in  ancient  times),  but  to  spiritual  and  eter- 
nal death.'  — From  Christ.  Separated  from  Christ,  from  the  fellow- 
ship with  Him. — For  my  brethren's  sake.  Not,  '  instead  of,'  which 
the  preposition,  of  itself,  does  not  mean,  but  for  their  benefit,  just  ai 
the  same  term  is  used  in  Eph.  8  :  13  ;  Col.  1 :  24  to  indicate  that  Paul's 
sufferings  might  result  advantageously  for  others. — My  kinsmen 
according  to  the  flesh.  Notice  the  tender  way  in  which  the  Apos- 
tle characterizes  the  Jews.  But  the  phrase  suggests  as  its  antithesis 
'brethren  in  the  Lord.'  Paul's  patriotism  grew  out  of  the  human 
consanguinity,  but  as  the  following  description  shows,  has  its  deepest 
ground  in  the  gracious  gifts  and  religious  privileges  hitherto  possessed 
by  his  countrymen.  So  too  his  sorrow  for  them  had  its  basis  in  the 
fact  that  apart  from  Christ  they  were  exposed  ta  the  wrath  of  God,  and 
on  the  road  to  eternal  death. 

Yer.  4.  Who  are.  The  form  of  the  original  is  almost  equivalent 
to  :  '  seeing  they  are.' — Israelites,  belonging  to  God's  chosen  people. 
In'ver.  3  it  is  stated  that  they  are  Paul's  people,  but  he  loved  them  all 


146  ROMANS  IX.  [9:  5. 

of  the  law,  and  tlie  service  of  God,  and  the  promises; 
5  whose  are  the  fathers,  and  of  whom  is  Christ  as  cou- 

the  more  because  they  were  God's  people,  descendants  of  one  whom 
God  Himself  had  chosen  and  named.  Since  their  advantages  grew  out 
of  this  relation,  all  the  privileges  named  point  toward  the  sovereignty 
of  God,  which  comes  into  view  in  the  subsequent  discussion  of  the 
enigma  presented  by  their  rejection  of  Christ.^ — 'Whose  is  the  adop- 
tion. Six  privileges  of  the  .Jews  are  enumerated  in  the  remainder  of 
this  verse:  '  purely  sacred,  historical  divine  benefactions'  (Meyer). 
The  first  is  'adoption,'  not  in  the  full  New  Testament  sense  (comp. 
vers.  6,  7),  but  in  the  theocratic  sense  pointing  forward  to  the  close 
union  between  God  and  men  formed  by  Christ  the  only  begotten, 
through  the  Holy  Ghost, — And  the  glory.  This  refers  to  the  visible 
Shekinah,  which  attended  the  people  of  Israel  through  the  wilderness. 
Those  who  insist  upon  a  chronological  order,  find  a  reference  to  earlier 
manifestations  of  Jehovah's  presence,  especially  as  'the  Angel  of  the 
Lord,'  with  which  the  later  appearance  is  identified,  however,  in  Ex. 
14  :  19. — And  the  covenants.  The  repeated  covenants  made  with 
the  patriarchs  after  the  first  covenant  with  Abraham,  not  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  (covenants),  nor  the  two  tables  of  the  law. — And  the 
giving  of  the  law.  Not  exactly  the  law  itself,  but  the  formal  and 
distinctive  act  by  which  it  became  the  possession  of  the  Jews ;  a 
secondary  reference  to  its  substance  may  be  implied. — And  the  ser- 
vice of  God,  i.  e.,  the  Jewish  (or.  Mosaic)  ritual  service  in  the  wor- 
ship of  God;  in  the  tabernacle  first,  and  then  more  fully  established  in 
the  temple. — And  the  promises.  This  includes  all  the  promises 
made  to  the  chosen  people,  from  the  days  of  Abraham  onward.  This 
inclusive  term  prepares  for  the  next  clause. 

Ver.  5.  Whose  are  the  fathers.  Persons  are  now  introduced : 
the  whole  line  of  patriarchs  and  prophets  were  types  of  Christ,  who  is 
•next  named,  as  the  crowning  glory  and  privilege  of  Paul's  nation. — 
Of  vyhom  is  Christ  as  concerning  the  flesh.  The  oi-iginal 
is  peculiar,  suggesting  a  limitation,  or,  antithesis :  as  fir  as  concerns 
the  flesh,  i.  e.,  His  human  nature,  as  in  chap.  1  :  3. — Who  is  over 
all,  etc.  The  natural  connection  of  this  clause  is  with  what  precedes, 
especially  since  the  last  expression  used  suggests  an  antithesis.  Ac- 
cordingly, this  has  usually  been  referred  to  Christ,  as  defining  what 
He  is,  other  than  '  according  to  the  flesh.'  As,  however,  our  earliest 
manuscripts  are  without  punctuation,  some  editors  and  commentators, 
prominent  among  whom  are  Tischendorf  (8th  ed.)  and  Meyer,  separate 
this  from  what  precedes,  taking  it  as  a  doxology.  This  would  require 
one  of  the  following  translations  :  '  He  who  is  over  all,  God,  he  (or,  is) 
blessed  for  ever,  adopted  by  Reiche,  Van  Hengel,  and  others  (Am.  Com. 
marg.),  or,  'He  who  is  God  over  all  [be)  blessed  for  ever,'  adopted  by 
Meyer  and  others  (R.  V.  marg.  Eng.  Com.  first  alternate  rendering). 
Another,  but  the  least  defensible,  view  sets  a  period  after  *  over  all,' 
including  in  the  doxology  only  the  words,  '  God  be  blessed  forever.' 


9:  5.]  ROMANS  IX.  147 

cerniDg  the  flesh,  hvho  is  over  all,  God  blessed  ^for 
ever."^     Amen. 

1  Some  modem  interpreters  place  a  full  stop  after /esA,  and  translate,  He  who  is  God 
over  all  be  (is)  blessed  for  ever:  or,  He  who  is  over  all  is  God,  blessed  for  ever.     Others 
punctuate,  flesh,  who  is  over  all.     God  be  (is)  blessed  for  ever. 
2  Gr.  unto  the  ages. 

*  For  marg.  ^  read  Or,  flesh  :  he  who  is  over  all,  God,  be  blessed  for  ever. — Am.  Com. 

So  Eng  marg.,  last  alternate  rendering.  Any  one  of  these  explana- 
tions is  possible,  and  .would  be  preferable  to  the  usual  one,  if  it  were 
proven  that  the  word  '  God,'  standing  without  the  article,  as  here,  is 
never  applied  to  Christ  in  the  New  Testament.  But  Meyer  not  only 
admits  that  John  thus  applies  it,  but  that  Paul  also  might  have  done 
so,  '  by  virtue  of  his  essential  agreement  in  substance  with  the  Christ- 
ology  of  John'  (Meyer,  Romans,  ii.  118).  The  objection  he  raises  is 
that  Paul  has  never  done  so.  After  renewed  investigation  of  the  sub- 
ject, we  feel  constrained  to  say  that  this  is  the  only  objection  that  is 
even  plausible,  and  that  it  is  clearly  outweighed  by  the  many  consider- 
ations to  be  presented  in  favor  of  the  usual  punctuation.  (1.)  We  say 
'usual  punctuation,'  for  in  all  ihe  authorities  which  can  give  evidence 
on  a  matter  of  punctuation  (manuscripts,  versions,  and  fath,ers),  the 
unanimity  is  very  remarkable.  All  the  early  writers  accepted  this 
view  with  the  single  exception  of  Diodorus  of  Tarsus.  (2.)  It  must  be 
admitted  that  the  fulfilment  of  God's  promises  in  the  coming  of  Christ 
might  evoke  a  doxology  to  God  at  this  point  of  the  Apostle's  discourse. 
(Comp.  Beet  in  loco,  and  the  exhaustive  discussion  of  Prof  Ezra  Abbot, 
Journal  of  Soc.  Bih.  Exegesis,  1881.)  '  Intended  doxoiogies,  caused  by 
a  sudden  access  of  pious  feeling,  are  not  uncommon  in  the  writings  of 
St.  Paul,  but  they  are  either  worked  into  the  regular  order  of  the  sen- 
tence, as  in  chap.  1  :  25 ;  Gal.  7  :  5,  or  else  they  are  formally  intro- 
duced, as  in  2  Cor.  11  :  31  ;  1  Tim.  1:17'  (Sanday).  Those  who  hold 
that  Paul  held  the  same  view  of  our  Lord's  Person  as  that  expressed 
by  John,  will  regard  the  context  as  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  reference 
to  Christ.  (3.)  Furthermore,  in  all  such  doxologies,  as  the  other  view 
would  make  of  this,  the  word  '  Blessed'  stands  first.  f4.)  The  words 
'who  is'  would  be  unnecessary  if  this  were  a  doxology.  (5.)  As  regards 
the  objection  drawn  from  Paul's  usage,  we  may  not  only  cite  such  pas- 
sages as  Col.  1  :  15,  etc.,  but  argue  that  for  this  Apostle  not  to  have 
added  something  in  regard  to  the  Divine  nature  of  Christ  would  be  far 
more  unlike  him  than  for  him  to  have  once  expressed  himself  in  terms 
which  agree,  not  only  with  the  expressions  of  John,  but  also  with  his 
own  statements.  Even  if  the  clause  be  taken  as  a  doxology,  the  Di- 
vinity of  Christ  is  not  thereby  proven  unscriptural ;  while  on  the  other 
hand,  if  the  usual  view  be  correct,  there  is  no  room  for  a  denial  of 
that  doctrine.  Paul  could  not  have  been  ignorant  of  the  great  ques- 
tion of  the  Master,  which  soon  became  the  question  of  the  Church, 
'What  think  ye  of  Christ?  whose  Son  is  he?'  (Matt.  22  :  42.)  Is^  it 
likely  that  he  could  so  express  himself  as  to  mislead  the  vast  majority 


148  ROMANS  IX.  [9:  6. 

Chapter  9  :  6-29. 

GgcVs  promise  is  not  Void. 

6  But  it  is  not  as  though  the  word  of  God  hath  come  to 
nought.     For  they  are  not  all   Israel,  which   are  of 

of  Christians  on  that  point  ?  '  It  therefore  does  not  seem  to  us  at  all 
doubtful,  that  Paul  here  indicates,  as  the  crown  of  all  the  prerogatives 
accorded  to  Israel,  that  of  having  produced  for  the  world  the  Christ, 
who  now,  exalted  above  all  things,  is  God  blessed  for  ever'  (Godet). 

As  regards  details  :  '  overall'  seems  to  refer  to  all  things,  not  to  the 
exclusion  of  persons  (comp.  Eph.  1  :  21-23,  and  similar  passages). 
*  Who  is'  points  to  the  present  exalted  condition  of  the  Incarnate  Lord. 
— God.  The  words  'over  all'  should  not  be  joined  with  this,  as  is 
done  by  many  of  those  who  could  find  here  a  doxology  to  God  the 
Father  Almighty.  Such  an  idea  would  have  been  expressed  in  another 
form  from  that  here  used. — Blessed  for  ever.  'The  expression 
"Blessed  for  ever"  is  twice  besides  used  by  St.  Paul,  and  each  time 
unquestionably  not  in  an  ascription  of  praise,  but  in  an  assertion 
regarding  the  subject  of  the  sentence.  The  places  are,  phap.  1  :  25, 
and  2  Cor.  11  :  31 :  whereas  he  uses  the  phrase  "  Blessed  be  God"  as 
an  ascription  of  praise  without  joining  "  for  ever"  '  (Alford). — 
Amen.  This  conclusion  is  appropriate  in  either  view  of  the  passage. 
For  if  this  is  indeed  the  only  place  where  Paul  directly  calls  Christ 
'  God,'  the  mention  of  this  coming  privilege  of  Israel  might  well  be 
regarded  as  an  act  of  worship,  to  which  he  devoutly  adds :   Amen. 

II.   God's  Promise  is  not  Void,  vers.  6-29. 
(It  is  necessary  here,  as  in  a  few  other  instances,  to  divide  a  paragraph  of  the  R.  V.) 

The  rejection  of  the  gospel  by  the  Jews,  which  lias  caused  the  deep  emotion  of  the 
Apoatle  in  view  of  their  great  privileges  (vers.  1-5),  does  not  render  God's  promise 
void.  This  position  the  Apostle  proves  :  {n.)  By  showing  that  this  promise  was  made 
of  free  grace,  only  to  those  wh  >  were  individually  chosen  (vers.  6-13).  Two  Old 
Testament  illustrations  are  cited :  the  case  of  Isaac  (vers.  7-9),  and  that  of  Jacob 
(vers.  10-13).  {h)  But  this  assertion  of  God's  freedom  may  give  rise  to  the  false  in- 
ference that  God  is  unrighteous  in  thus  choosing  (ver.  14).  But  this  very  objection 
involves  an  admission  of  the  fact  of  God's  soverei.;;;nty  (implying  that  His  promise  is 
not  void),  which  the  Apostle  aflRrms,  citing  the  case  of  Pharaoh  (vers.  15-18*.  An- 
other objection  is  then  raised:  if  God  is  sovereign,  why  doth  He  find  fault  (ver.  19). 
This  objection  the  Apostle  answers  by  reasserting  God's  sovereignty  (vers.  20,  21),  but 
suggesting  that  even  in  the  exercise  of  this,  His  right,  long-suffering  and  mercy  are 
displayed  (vers  22,  23),  especially  the  latter  to  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  (ver.  24),  in 
accordance  with  various  Old  Testament  predictions  (vers.  25-29). 

As  regards  the  free,  unconditioned  grace  of  God,  this  must  be  deemed  the  funda- 
mental fact  in  the  discussion.  We  may  further  assume  that  Paul  holds  this  in  such  a 
■way  as  to  exclude  every  theory  which  makes  God  the  author  of  sin.  In  other  words, 
the  Apostle,  in  accordance  with  the  teachings  of  the  Scriptures  as  a  whole,  presents, 


9:0.]  ROMANS  IX.  149 

on  the  one  hand,  the  absolute  causality  and  unconditiuned  grace  of  God  ;  and,  on  the 
other,  the  moral  nature  of  mau,  including  also  that  relative  freedom  which  involves 
human  responsibility  (human  personality).  To  reconcile  these  two  truths  is  the 
problem  which  confronts  every  one  who  believes  in  a  pergonal  God  and  is  conscious  of 
his  own  responsibility.  Thus  far  the  Christian  life  has  proved  the  only  practical 
solutiun.  while  Christian  theology  has  been  busied  witli  the  necessary  task  of  attempt- 
ing a  tlieoretical  solution.  Pmbably  such  a  solution  will  be  reached,  only  when  the 
full  victory  over  evil  has  been  achieved.  We  add  the  following  remarks  (comp. 
Schaff,  in  Lange,  Romans) : 

(1  )  The  Scriptures  teach  an  eternal  predestination  of  believers  unto  holiness  and 
blessedness,  and  hence  they  must  ascribe  all  the  glory  of  their  redemption,  from  be- 
ginning to  end,  to  the  unmerited  grace  of  God  alone. 

(2.)  But  it  is  as  plainly  assened  or  assumed  that  believers  do  not,  on  this  account, 
cease  to  be  free  agents,  responsible  for  all  their  doings.  As  God  works  in  nature,  not 
magically  and  immediately,  but  through  natural  laws,  so  He  works  in  men,  through 
their  wills,  hence  through  the  mediation  of  finite  causes ;  the  more  His  grace  is  de- 
veloped wiihin  them,  so  much  the  mure  is  their  true  freedom  developed;  the  result 
being  the  coincidance  of  perfect  holiness  and  perfect  freedom.  For  the  highest  free- 
dom is  the  complete  triumph  over  the  evil,  and  is  consequently  identical  with  the 
moral  necessity  of  the  good.     In  this  sensi',  God  is  free,  precisely  because  He  is  holy. 

(3.)  It  is  nowhere  asserted  that  God  has  foreordained  sin  us  sm,  although  He  has 
foreseen  it  from  all  eternity,  and  with  respec  to  redemption,  permitted  it,  while  con- 
stantly overruling  it  to  His  purposes.  Hence  those  who  are  lost  are  lost  through  their 
own  fault,  and  must  blame  their  own  unbelief,  which  rejects  the  means  of  salvation 
proffered  them  by  God  (conip.  chap.  9  :  3U-33). 

(4.)  In  the  time  of  the  calling  of  nations  and  individuals  to  salvation,  God  proceeds 
according  to  a  plan  of  eternal  wisdom  and  love,  which  we  cannot  fathom  here,  but 
should  reverently  adore. 

(5.)  The  doctrine  of  election  is  designed  and  adapted  to  humble  sinners,  and  to  com- 
fort believers,  while  it  increases  their  gratitude  and  happiness.  Only  a  culpable  misap- 
prehension and  misuse  of  it  can  lead  either  to  a  careless  security  or  to  despair.  But 
because  the  depths  of  the  divine  decrees  cannot  be  fathomed,  the  Christian  may  well 
ac'_-  pt  the  doctrine,  not  to  puzzle  himself  with  attempts  to  solve  the  mystery,  but  to 
gain  new  encouragement  to  make  his  own  calling  and  election  sure,  and  with  fear  and 
trembling  to  work  out  his  own  salvation. 

Ver.  6.  But  it  is  not  as  though.  The  Apostle  returns  to  the 
fact  that  the  Jews  rejected  the  gospel,  and  proceeds  to  account  for  it 
by  stating  that  the  promise  holds  good  only  for  the  true  Israelites  ;  a 
result  indicated  in  the  Scriptures.  The  opening  clause,  which  is  quite 
peculiar,  means  :  *  What  I  am  saying  is  not  of  such  a  kind  as  to  mean 
that,'  or,  '  the  matter  is  not  of  such  a  kind  that.'  The  former  sense 
would  imply  the  latter.  Whatever  he  says,  he  does  not  mean  that  the 
word  of  God  hath  come  to  nought.  The  promise  of  God,  as 
given  in  the  Old  Testament,  has  not  '  fallen  to  the  ground,'  notwith- 
standing the  unbelief  of  the  Jews. — For  they  are  not  all  Israel 
(constitute  the  true  Israel  of  God),  ■which  are  of  Israel,  i.  e.,  Isra- 
elites by  birth.     The  exact  form  of  the  original  cannot  be  i  eproduced, 


150  ROMANS  IX.  [9 :  7,  8. 

7  Israel :  neither,  because  they  are  Abraham's  seed,  are 

they  all  children :  but,  In  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be  called. 

;  8  That  is,  it  is  not  the   children  of  the  flesh  that  are 

children  of  God ;  but  the  children  of  the  promise  are 

but  the  meaning  is  unmistakable.  The  Apostle  here  presents  the  nega- 
tive side  of  the  idea  already  advanced  in  this  Epistle  (chap.  4:12)  and 
in  Gal.  3  :  9,  that  physical  relationship  does  not  constitute  membership 
in  the  true  Israel, 

Ver.  7.  Neither;  'and  also  not,'  extending  the  same  thought  to 
physical  relationship  with  Abraham,  the  father  of  the  faithful.— Be- 
cause they  ;  either,  '  all  those  of  Abraham,'  or,  referring  to  the  sub- 
ject in  ver,  6 :  '  they  which  are  of  Israel.'  The  foi^mer  suits  the  imme- 
diate context  (Isaac  and  Ishmael,  Jacob  and  Esau),  but  the  latter  Is 
grammatically  more  exact.— The  seed  of  Abraham.  A  well-known 
phrase,  here  meaning,  as  the  context  shows,  '  the  physical  posterity  of 
Abraham';  in  Gal.  8  :  20,  the  phrase  is  used  of  his  true  spiritual  de- 
scendants.— All  children  ;  in  the  true,  spiritual  sense,  inheritors  of 
the  promise  made  to  him. — But ;  on  the  contrary,  the  Scripture  itself 
shows  that  this  was  the  design. — In  Isaac  shall  thy  seed  be  called. 
Spoken  to  Abraham  (Gen,  21  :  12),  at  the  time  when  Hagar  and  Ish- 
mael were  sent  away.  Explanations:  1,  In  the  person  of  Isaac  shall 
thy  seed  be  named.  2,  Through  Isaac  shall  the  race  be  born  which 
shall  be  truly  and  properly  called  thy  seed.  Both  are  true  in  fact,  but 
as  the  Apostle  is  choosing  historical  illustrations,  it  seems  better  to 
accept  (1.)  which  refers  to  the  historical  person.  'Called'  is  here  = 
'named,'  not,  'called  into  being,'  or,  'chosen.'  'Paul  finds  in  this 
divine  declai-ation  the  idea  enunciated  (ver.  8,)  that  not  on  bodily  de- 
scent (which  was  also  the  case  with  Ishmael),  but  on  divine  promise 
(which  was  the  case  with  Isaac,  ver.  9),  the  true  sonship  of  Abraham 
is  founded'  (Meyer). 

Yer.  8.  That  is ;  the  Old  Testament  saying  amounts  to  this. — It 
is  not  the  children  cf  the  flesh  that  are  children  of  God. 
Not  those  who  must  be  regarded  merely  as  the  fruit  of  physical  gen- 
eration, as  was  the  case  with  Ishmael  (comp.  Gal.  4:  23), — But  the 
children  of  the  promise  are  reckoned  for  a  seed.  The  refer- 
ence is  directly  to  the  birth  of  Isaac  (ver.  9),  but  also  to  his  true  de- 
scendants, who  '  are  reckoned '  such  in  virtue  of  the  promise.  The 
birth  of  Isaac  was  not  only  according  to  the  promise,  but  God  inter- 
vened through  the  promise,  which  Abraham  believed,  and  thus  by  his 
faith  in  the  promise  obtained  the  power  that  rendered  him  capable  of 
becoming  the  father  of  this  son  (comp,  chap,  4:  16-21),  'In  virtue 
of  this  superior  element,  Isaac  and  his  descendants  alone  could  be  re- 
garded as  "children  of  God."  It  is  this  which  explains  the  second 
proposition  of  the  verse,  where  the  title  of  (promised)  posterity  is  ex- 
pressly given  to  that  descent  obtained  through  f^aith  in  the  promise. 
The  fii'st  proposition  of  the  verse  by  implication  justifies  the  rejection 
of  carnal  Jews  ;  the  second,  the  adoption  of  believing  Gentiles '  (Godet). 


9:  9-11.]  ROMANS  IX.  151 

9  reckoned  for  a  seed.     For  this  is  a  word  of  promise, 
According  to  this  season  will  I  come,  and  Sarah  shall 

10  have  a  son.     And  not  only  so ;  but  Rebecca  also  hav- 

11  iug  conceived  bv  one,  even  by  our  father  Isaac — for  the 
children  being  not  yet  born,  neither  having  done  any- 
thing good  or  bad,  that  the  purpose  of  God  according 
to  election  might  stand,  not  of  works,  but  of  him  that 

Ver.  9.  For  this  is  a  -word  of  promise,  or,  '  of  promise  is  this 
word.'  That  '  the  children  of  the  pi'omise  are  reckoned  for  a  seed'  is 
proven,  for  the  word,  in  accordance  with  which  the  birth  of  Isaac  took 
place,  this  passage  now  cited,  is  a  word  of  promise.  Not  'was,'  for 
the  reference  is  to  an  existent  passage  of  Scripture. )— According  to 
this  season.  The  passage  is  freely  quoted  from  the  LXX  (Gen.  18 : 
10,  14).  The  Hebrew  phrase  rendered:  'according  to  this  season,' 
means  'when  the  time  (shall  be)  reviving,'  /.  e..  at  this  season  of  the 
next  year:  so  the  LXX.  substantially.— And  Sarah  shall  have  a 
son.  From  Gen.  18 :  14,  substituted  for  a  similar  clause  in  ver.  10, 
because  of  the  erapha-fis  it  gives  (in  the  original)  to  the  word  'Sarah,' 
who  is  the  princinal  per.<on  (comp.  Gal.  4:  22,  etc.). 

Ver.  10.  And  not  only  so,  or,  '  this.'  These  words  introduce  a 
second  proof  from  history,  namely,  the  case  of  Rebecca  and  her  two 
sons,  one  of  whom  was  chosen.  '  This,'  is  slightly  preferable  to  '  so,' 
because  this  case  is  not  strictly  of  the  same  kind  as  that  of  Sarah,  but 
furnishes  a  stronger  proof. — But  Rebecca  also.  Some  explain: 
not  only  Sarah,  but  Rebecca  also,  had  a  divine  promise,  was  treated  in 
the  same  manner.  Others  find  a  broken  construction,  '  Rebecca'  being 
re-introduced  in  ver.  12:  'unto  her.'  Accepting  the  latter  view,  we 
place  a  dash  at  the  end  of  this  verse.  In  any  case  '  also  '  points  to  the 
previous  case  of  Sarah. — Having  conceived  by  one,  even  by 
our  father  Isaac.  In  the  previous  instance  the  two  children  wer^" 
of  two  mothers  ;  here  the  children  were  twins,  having  the  same  father 
and  mother,  and  yet  of  such  a  diflFerent  destiny.  'Our  father  Isaac;' 
recalling  the  quotation  in  ver.  7. 

Ver.  11.  The  R.  V.  properly  places  a  dash  at  the  end  of  ver.  10. — 
For  the  children,  etc.  The  form  of  the  Greek  is  peculiar  ;  the  R. 
V.  supplies  '  the  children,'  to  relieve  the  difficulty  of  the  construction. 
—  Good  or  bad.  The  latter  word  represents  a  different  reading 
from  that  followed  in  the  A.  V.  The  term  has  a  wider  range  of  mean- 
ing than  '  evil,'  though  here  it  means  immoral.  This  clause  incidentally 
opposes  the  doctrine  of  the  preexistence  of  souls,  and  a  previous  fall. 
— That  the  purpose  of  God  according  to  election.  This 
clause  indicates  the  purpose  of  what  was  said  to  Rebecca,  and  is  put 
first  for  emphasis.  The  phrase,  'according  to  election,'  is  closely 
joined  with  '  purpose ; '  '  the  purpose  which  was  so  formed,  that  in  it 
an  election  was  made'  (Meyer).     Both  are  'before  the  foundation  of 


152  ROMANS  IX.  [9:12,13. 

12  calleth,  it  was  said  unto  her,  The  elder  shall  serve  the 

13  younger.     Even  as  it  is  written, -Jacob  I  loved,  but 
Esau  I  hated. 

the  world'  (Eph.  1:4;  8:  11).  The  whole  expression  involves  God's 
freedom  in  His  choice  of  individuals  as  an  essential  part  of  His  pur- 
pose of  redemption.  Whether  we  can  reconcile  this  with  our  con- 
sciousness of  freedom,  or  not,  it  is  here  asserted  to  be  a  fact. — Might 
stand,  unchangeable,  instead  of  'coming  to  nought'  (ver.  6);  and 
this,  not  simply  in  man's  estimate,  but  in  reality.  'It  is  not  only  in 
the  thought  of  man,  it  is  reallr/  that  the  liberty  of  God  would  be  com- 
promised, if  any  human  merit  regulated  His  choice'  (Godet).— Not 
of  works,  but  of  him  that  calleth.  This  is  joined  by  some 
with  'purpose,'  by  others  with  'abide,'  but  is  most  correctly  taken  by 
others,  as  a  definition  of  the  whole  preceding  clause :  and  this  design, 
that  his  purpose  according  to  election  might  abide,  was  not  effected  by 
reason  of  works,  did  not  depend  on  works,  but  on  God  Himself  who 
calls.  Whatever  view  be  taken  of  the  connection,  the  ultimate  ground 
of  our  salvation  is  in  God  Himself.  '  God  does  not  choose  us  because 
we  believe,  but  that  we  may  believe'  (Augustine).  Our  salvation  is 
not  on  account  of  faith,  but  through  faith. 

Ver.  12.  It  was  said  unto  her.  Gen.  25:  23;  here  cited,  quite 
closely,  from  the  LXX. — The  elder  shall  serve  the  younger ;  lit., 
'the  greater  shall  serve  the  less.'  As  spoken  to  Rebecca,  this  lan- 
guage referred  not  only  to  the  tAvin  children,  but  to  the  nations  spring- 
ing from  them  respectively  (Gen.  25:  23:  'two  nations  are  in  thy 
womb').  Hence  it  seems  best  to  accept  here  both  the  national  and  the 
personal  reference.  The  former  is  required  by  the  citation  from  Mala- 
chi  (see  ver,  13),  but  the  latter  is  necessary  to  give  point  to  the  argu- 
ment of  the  Apostle.  As  respects  the  nations,  the  prophecy  was  ful- 
filled in  the  days  of  David,  who  conquered  the  Edomites  (2  Sam.  8  :  14), 
but  how  unlikely  that  Paul  would,  in  this  connection,  separate  the 
nations  from  their  respective  ancestors,  especially  when  the  prophecy 
became  a  fact  in  the  history  of  the  two  brothers  themselves;  comp. 
Gen.  27  :  29,  37,  40.  Eternal  results  in  the  case  of  these  persons  are 
not  involved  in  the  original  prophecy  ;  and  doubtless  theocratic  privi- 
leges and  promises  are  more  prominently  in  the  mind  of  the  Apostle 
in  these  historical  cases. 

Ver.  13.  As  it  is  written  (Mai.  1 :  2,  3),  Jacob  I  loved,  but 
Esau  I  hated.  In  the  original  prophecy  the  statement  that  Esau 
was  hated,  is  proved  by  the  added  words  :  '  and  laid  his  mountains 
and  his  heritage  waste  for  the  dragons  of  the  wilderness.'  The  refer- 
ence to  the  nation  of  Edomites  is  therefore  clear.  'As  it  is  written,' 
however,  implies  a  correspondence  with  ver.  12.  We  therefore,  apply 
the  language  to  Jacob  and  Esau  personally,  regarding  the  national 
destiny  as  bound  up  in  the  personal  position  of  the  two  ancestors. 
JThe  word  'hated'  seems  harsh,  and  hence  some  explain  it  as  'love 
le^,'  making  the  whole  passage  to  mean,  '  I  preferred  Jacob  to  Esau.' 


9:  14.]  ROMANS  IX.  153 

14      What  shall  we  say  then  ?    Is  there  unrighteousness 

But,  despite  such  instances  as  Luke  14 :  24,  compared  with  Matt.  10 : 
37,  this  explanation  is  not  allowable.  The  historical  dealings  of  God 
with  Esau  (and  with  Edom  also),  indicate,  not  less  love,  but  the  de- 
privation or  absence  of  love,  to  say  the  least.  '  God  loves  the  good, 
because  He  produces  the  very  good  that  is  in  them  ;  and  He  elects 
them  not  on  account  of  their  faith  and  their  holiness,  but  to  faith  and 
holiness.  But  it  cannot  be  said,  on  the  other  hand,  that  He  hates  the 
evil  men  because  He  produces  the  very  evil  that  is  in  them ;  for  that 
would  be  absurd,  and  destroy  His  holiness ;  but  He  hates  them  on  ac- 
count of  the  evil  that  they  do  or  will  do  in  opposition  to  His  will. 
While  human  goodness  is  the  effect  of  Divine  love  and  grace,  on  the 
contrary,  human  wickedness  is  the  cause  of  Divine  hatred  and  abhor- 
rence ;  and  on  that  account  alone  can  it  be  the  object  of  the  punitive 
wrath,  and  condemnatory  decree  of  God.'  (Schaif,  in  Lange,  Romans, 
p.  328.)  This  is  implied  in  the  subsequent  discussion,  where  the  ill 
desert  of  all  men  is  assumed,  and  salvation  in  the  case  of  any  pre- 
sented as  caused  by  God's  mercy.  But  whatever  be  the  extent  of  the 
preference,  or  the  result  of  the  choice  in  the  case  of  Jacob  and  Esau, 
the  main  thought  is  :  God  does  exercise  a  prerogative  of  election,  in- 
dependently of  the  human  considerations  referred  to  in  these  in- 
stances. That  this  is  Paul's  meaning  is  evident  from  what  immedi- 
ately follows.  His  assertion  of  the  freedom  of  God  might  be  used  to 
impeach  His  moral  character.  If  the  Apostle's  argument  thus  far  had 
not  plainly  set  forth  that  freedom,  the  objection  of  ver.  14  could  not 
have  been  raised. 

Ver.  14.  What  shall  -we  say  then  ?  This  question  introduces 
an  objection,  as  in  chaps.  3  :  5  ;  6  :  1 ;  7  :  7,  which  is  then  stated  in 
the  form  of  another  question.  The  usual  indignant  denial  follows, 
and  then  the  detailed  answer  (vers.  15-18).  In  ver.  19,  etc.,  a  fur- 
ther objection  (growing  out  of  the  answer  to  this  one)  is  raised  and 
answered.  The  question  is  not  put  in  the  mouth  of  an  objector,  still 
less  is  it  represented  as  the  language  of  an  unbelieving  Jew,  The 
connection  of  thought  is  natural  :  may  it  not  be  said  that  the  exer- 
cise of  this  free  choice  on  the  part  of  God,  as  already  illustrated,  in- 
volves the  unrighteousness  in  Him  ?  Let  it  never  be  !  He  only  is 
unrighteous  who  is  under  obligations  which  he  does  not  fulfil ;  but 
God  is  under  no  obligations  to  His  creatures  who  have  become  sinful, 
i.  e,,  opposed  to  Him.  The  blessings  they  receive  of  Him  are  not 
their  right,  but  of  His  mercy,  as  the  words  of  God  Himself  in  the  Old 
Testament  plainly  show.  The  underlying  principle  already  assumed 
in  this  Epistle,  is  that  God's  will  is  the  absolute  and  eternal  norm  of 
righteousness,  and  all  that  He  does  is  necessarily  right  see  (refer- 
ences). If  there  were  any  superior  norm  of  righteousness  to  which 
this  personal  God  is  subject,  then  He  would  cease  to  be  God. — Is 
there  unrighteousness  v/ith  God  ?  In  making  this  choice  of 
individuals.     The  objection  ends  here. — God  forbid.     See  chap.  3  : 


154  ROMANS  IX.  [9:  15-17. 

15  with  God  ?  God  forbid.     For  he  saith  to  Moses,  I 
will  have  mercy  on  whom  J  have  mercy,  and  I  will 

16  have  compassion  on  whom  I  have  compassion.     So 
then  it  is  not  of  him  that  willeth,  nor  of  him  that 

17  runneth,  but  of  God  that  hath  mercy.     For  the  scrip- 

4,  etc.  Some  of  the  fathers  took  vers.  15-18  as  a  renewal  of  the  ob- 
jection, but  the  close  connection,  with  '  for  '  and  '  so  then,'  as  well  as 
the  Scripture  citations,  show  that  those  verses  give  the  reason  for  this 
indignant  denial. 

Ver.  15.  For  he  saith  to  Moses.  An  exact  quotation  from 
the  LXX.  (Exod.  33:  19),  giving  part  of  Jehovah's  answer  to 
Moses,  when  on  Mount  Sinai,  he  said  :  '  I  beseech  thee,  show  me 
thy  glory.'  *  In  condescending  to  grant  this  request,  the  Lord  would 
have  him  understand  that  nothing  in  him,  notwithstanding  all 
he  had  been  ^le  to  do  for  the  service  of  God,  would  merit  such 
a  favor.  If  God  accorded  it  to  him  it  was  not  because  it  was  Moses 
who  besought  Him,  or  had  any  right  to  it,  it  was  pure  grace  on  His 
part '  (Godet). — On  -whom  I  have  mercy.  The  present  tense  is 
vised  in  this  and  the  corresponding  clause  (•  I  have  compassion  '),  re- 
ferring to  the  settled  disposition  of  mercy  and  compassion.  The  word 
*  whom  '  in  both  instances  might  be  rendered  '  whomsoever,'  and  has 
an  emphasis  here,  describing  not  merely  the  mercy,  but  the  choice  of 
the  individual  objects  as  the  fx-ee  act  of  God. — Have  compassion 
is  stronger  than  '  have  mercy ;  '  it  ordinarily  includes  outward  mani- 
festations of  compassion.  The  future  tenses  ('  will  have  mercy,'  '  will 
have  compassion')  point  to  the  active  exercise  of  God's  mercy  and 
compassion. 

Ver.  16.  So  then.  With  this  favorite  expression,  Paul  introduces 
an  infei'ence  from  the  passage  cited  :  '  In  consequence  of  all  this,  it  is 
proven  that.'  The  word  to  Moses  is  accepted  as  a  divine  axiom,  and  the 
inference  is  to  be  regarded  as  of  universal  validity,  since  neither  the 
preceding  context  nor  the  scope  of  the  argument  suggests  any  limita- 
tion. '  It  is  in  parts  of  Scripture  like  this  that  we  must  be  especially 
careful  not  to  fall  short  of  ivhat  is  written — not  to  allow  of  any  compro- 
mise of  the  plain  and  awful  words  of  God's  Spirit,  for  the  sake  of  a 
caution  which  He  Himself  does  not  teach  us'  (Alford). — It  is  not  of 
him  that  "willeth,  etc.  The  participation  in  any  and  all  of  the 
effects  of  God's  mercy  and  compassion,  does  not  depend  on  human 
will,  nor  on  human  effort,  but  on  the  will  of  God,  who  thus  spoke 
to  Moses.  The  reference  of  'him  that  willeth'  to  Abraham's  wish 
respecting  Ishmael,  and  of  'him  that  runneth'  to  Esau's  running 
home  from  hunting,  is  worth  mentioning  as  a  specimen  of  far-fetched 
interpretation. 

Ver.  17.  For  the  Scripture  saith  unto  Pharaoh.  What  the 
Sci'ipture  says  is  here  regarded  as  equivalent  to  what  God  says  ;  comp. 
Gal.  3  :  8,  22.     The  choice  of  an  illustration  outside  the  Jewish  naticm 


9:  18.]  ROMANS  IX.  155 

ture  saith  unto  Pharaoh,  For  this  very  purpose  did  I 
raise  thee  up  that  I  might  shew  in  thee  my  power, 
and  that  my  name  might  be  published  abroad  in  all 
18  the  earth.  So  then  he  hath  mercy  on  whom  he  will, 
and  whom  he  will  he  hardeneth. 

confirms  the  view  that  Paul  is  here  concerned*  with  principles  of  uni- 
versal application.  The  case  of  Pharaoh  presents  the  antithesis  to 
God's  showing  mercy. — For  this  very  purpose  did  I  raise  thee 
up.  Freely  quoted  from  the  LXX.  (Exod.  9:  16).  Moses  was  com- 
manded to  say  this  to  Pharaoh,  after  the  sixth  plague  had  fallen  on 
Egypt.  The  main  question  is  respecting  the  meaning  of  '  did  I  raise 
thee  up,'  which  is  an  exact  translation  of  Paul's  language.  But  the 
Hebrew  means  literally :  '  have  caused  thee  to  stand,'  and  this  the 
LXX.  weakens  into  'thou  wert  preserved.  Explanations:  (1.)  'Al- 
lowed tl  ee  to  appear,'  thy  whole  historical  appearance  has  been  brought 
about  by  me,  in  order  that,  etc.  This  is  the  view  of  the  majority  of 
our  best  modern  commentators.  It  is  neither  fatalistic,  nor  does  it 
improperly  weaken  the  strong  language  of  the  Apostle.  Since  God 
numbers  the  hairs  of  our  head,  He  superintended  the  exodus  of  His 
people,  and  in  this  as  a  matter  of  history,  the  principal  human  factor 
was  Pharaoh.  He  did  not  cause  the  evil,  but  bent  and  guided  it  for 
His  own  glory.  (2.)  '  Preserved  thee  alive.'  This  agrees  with  the 
LXX.  But  Paul  has,  apparently  with  purpose,  deviated  from  that 
tran^ation.  Moreover,  this  view  fails  to  give  sufficient  strength  to  this 
link  in  the  chain  of  the  Apostle's  reasoning.  (3.)  '  Excited  thee  to 
opposition.'  But  this  does  not  agree  either  with  the  original  Hebrew, 
or  with  the  LXX.  Nor  does  the  context  sustain  it,  since  the  reference 
to  hardening  in  v^r.  18  is  based  upon  this  verse  as  a  whole,  not  on  the 
sense  of  this  phrase.  (-4.)  'Created  thee,'  as  a  hardened  sinner.  This 
is  a  fatalistic  view,  alike  uncalled  for  by  the  words  of  the  argument. 
The  first  view  is,  therefore,  decidedly  preferable. — That  I  might 
shew  in  thee  my  power.  This  purpose  was  accomplished  in  the 
case  of  Pharaoh  by  means  of  the  supernatural  events  accompanying 
the  deliverance  of  the  Israelites,  which  were  called  forth  by  the  oppo- 
sition of  Pharaoh. — My  name  might  be  published  abroad,  etc. 
Further  purpose.  Comp.  the  song  of  Moses,  after  the  destruction  of 
Pharaoh's  army  (Exod.  15:  1-19,  especially  where  he  refers  to  the 
effect  produced  on  other  nations  by  these  events. — In  all  the  earth. 
*  A  result  which  in  the  later  course  of  history,  was  especially  fulfilled 
in  the  dispersion  of  the  Jews  and  the  spread  of  Christianity,  and  con- 
tinues to  be  fulfilled'  (Meyer).  Comp.  the  many  allusions  in  the 
Psalms  to  these  events  as  fulfilling  these  purposes. 

Ver.  18.  So  then  (as  in  ver.  16  :  the  A.  V.  varies  unnecessarily), 
summing  up  the  whole  matter,  after  considering  both  sides.— He 
hath  mercy  on  whom  he  ■will.  Here  the  emphasis  rests  on 
'will;'  not,  as  in  ver.  15,  on  'whom.' — Whom  he  w^ill  he  hard- 


156  ROMANS  IX.  [9:  19,  20. 

19  ThoLi  wilt  say  then  unto  me,  Why  doth  he  still  find 

20  fault  ?  For  who  withstandeth  his  will  ?  Nay  but, 
O  man,  who  art  thou  that  repliest  against  God  ?  Shall 
the  thing  formed  say  to  him  that  formed  it,  Why  didst 

eneth.  Here,  as  throughout,  the  freedom  of  God  is  the  main  thought ; 
the  holiness,  love,  and  wisdom  of  His  will  are  implied.  Hence  we  say, 
this  freedom  is  not  arbitrary,  but  more  because  of  what  God  is,  than 
from  our  ability  to  explain  hoio  it  is  so.  As  respects  the  word  '  hard- 
eneth,'  it  assumes,  as  does  the  whole  discussion,  the  presence  of  sin  in 
the  individual,  without  referring  to  its  origin.  It  here  suggests  such 
a  fortification  in  sin,  that  the  sinner  is  unsusceptible  of  all  workings 
of  grace  and  better  influences,  the  removal  into  a  state  where  conver- 
sion is  either  absolutely  impossible,  or  rendered  difficult  in  the  highest 
degree.  This  may  be  termed  an  act  of  God,  in  so  far  as  He  has 
ordained  the  laws  of  the  development  of  evil,  '  that,  propagating  still, 
it  brings  foi'th  evil'  (Schiller).  The  objection  which  follows  (ver.  19) 
shows  that  the  Apostle  regards  this  hardening  of  Pharaoh  as  penal, 
and  hence  as  to  some  extent  effected  by  God.  The  personal  tone  of  the 
answer  (ver.  20)  indicates  furtlier  that  the  principle  is  of  universal 
application. 

Ver.  19.  Thou  -wilt  say  then  unto  me.  This  verse  states  a 
further  objection,  growing  out  ('  then  ')  of  what  has  already  been  said. 
It  is  not  necessary  even  here,  where  the  answer  is  so  sharply  personal, 
to  regard  the  objection  as  uttered  by  a  Jew.  For  it  will  arise,  wher- 
ever there  is  any  such  notion  of  God,  however  derived,  as  admiKs  the 
possibility  of  His  being  the  auth<.r  of  evil  in  man,  or  what  amounts  to 
the  same  thing,  denies  His  righteousness,  because  there  is  a  theoretical 
difficulty  in  reconciling  our  responsibility  with  His  free  will.  The 
difficulty  is  an  ontological  one :  Given  an  infinite  free  will,  how  can 
there  be  other  free  wifls? — "Why  doth  he  still  find  fault  ?  Some 
good  authorities  insert  'then,'  here  also,  referring  to  the  previous  dis- 
cussion. '  Still,'  this  being  the  ca'^e,  that  whom  He  will  He  hardens 
(ver.  18).— For  who  withstandeth  his  w^ill?  The  last  word  is 
peculiar,  meaning  '  the  thing  willed,'  but  implying  deliberation.  The 
R.  V.  properly  restores  the  present  tense.  The  question  implies  the 
helplessness  of  the  objector,  and  acknowledges  the  Almightiness  of 
God,  but  at  the  expense  of  His  rectitude,  since  it  virtually  makes  Him 
responsible  for  men's  sins. 

Ver.  20.  Nay  but.  An  unusual  word,  meaning,  *  Yes  indeed ;' 
here  used,  either  with  a  slight  tone  of  irony,  or,  more  probably,  of  in- 
dignant rebuke.  *  I  do  not  examine  the  intrinsic  verity  of  what  you 
allege;  but,  be  that  as  it  may,  this  much  is  certain,  that  you  are  not 
in  a  position  to  dispute  with  God'  (Godet). — O  man.  This  address 
suggests  the  contrast  between  man  and  God,  afterwards  brought  out 
nioie  fully. — Who  art  thou.  '  How  great  art  thou  ?  -That  repliest 
against  God.  The  peculiar  word  here  used  suggests  an  answer  given 
to  a  previous  response,  i.  e.,  to  God's  response  (finding  fault,  ver.  19) 


9:  21.]  ROMANS  IX.  157 

21  thou  make  me  thus  ?  Or  hath  not  the  potter  a  right 
over  the  clay,  from  the  same  lump  to  make  one  part  a 
vessel    unto    honour,   and    another    unto    dishonour  ? 

to  man's  sin. — Shall  the  thing  formed,  etc.  TVe  have  here  an  echo 
of  Isa.  24;  16  (not  a  quotation.)  "The  thing  formed,'  as  a  vessel  is 
moulded.  Hence  the  question  has  no  reference  to  original  creation, 
but  to  subsequent  ethical  moulding.  The  nature  of  the  '  clay '  and 
'  lump  '  is  not  yet  suggested.  The  original  indicates  that  a  negative 
answer  is  expected.— "Why  didst  thou  make  me  thus  ?  The 
word  '  make,'  in  accordance  with  what  precedes,  is  to  be  reterred  to 
preparing,  adjusting,  etc.,  not  to  creating.  The  folly,  rather  than  the 
error  of  the  objector,  is  thus  rebuked. 

Ver.  21.  Or  hath  not  the  potter.  'Or'  suggests  the  dilemma 
arising  out  of  the  figure:  Either  the  thing  formed  cannot  speak  thus, 
or,  the  potter  has  not  authority,  etc.  The  interrogative  form  here 
implies  an  affirmative  answer:  '  The  potter  has  authority.'  etc.  The 
figure  of  a  potter  is  found  in  the  Old  Testament  prophecies,  and 
here  undoubtedly  represents  God  Himself. — A  right ;  '  authority,' 
'privilege,'  not.  'power'  in  the  sense  of  '  force". — Over  the  clay. 
The  '  clay  '  represents  the  human  subjects  under  discussiou  ;  the  article 
suggests  that  it  is  the  potters  clay. — From  the  same  lump  to 
make,  etc.  The  whole  clause  explains  what  is  meant  by  the  '  authority  ' 
of  the  potter,  while  the  figure  itself  excludes  the  idea  of  creation. 
'  The  lump  '  and  '  the  clay  '  refer  t6  the  same  thing ;  the  latter  is  the 
sub.stance  itself,  the  former  presents  it  as  already  in  use  by  the  potter 
for  his  purposes.  To  limit  the  '  lump '  to  the  Jews  is  narrow,  and 
opposed  by  vers.  22,  24,  etc.  Meyer  explains  :  '  The  same  lump  denotes 
human  nature  in  and  of  itself,  as  with  its  opposite  moral  capabilities 
and  dispositions  it  is  equally  in  all,  but  not  yet  conceived  of  in  its 
definite  individual  moral  st<amp.'  Similarly  Godet:  -The  mass  repre- 
sents entire  humaniti/.  not  that  humanity  which  God  created,  but  in  that 
state  in  which  He  finds  it  at  each  moment  when  He  makes  it  serve  His 
reign.'  The  supralapsarian  explanation,  referring  it  to  the  created 
man,  seems  contrary  to  the  figure  and  to  revealed  facts.  The  view 
taken  of  the  moral  status  of  the  '  lump,'  representing  humanity,  will 
depend  largely  upon  the  interpretation  of  chap.  5:  12-21.  The  denial 
of  original  sin  makes  the  difficulty  here  all  the  greater. — One  part 
of  a  vessel  unto  honour,  and  another  unto  dishonour.  This 
rendering  is  more  exact  than  that  of  the  A.  V.  Ihe  potter  makes 
froai  t'le  same  lump,  a  part  into  a  vessel  designed  for  honorable  uses, 
and  another  is  for  dishonorable  uses.  The  emphasis  in  the  original 
seems  to  rest  on  the  words  '  unto  honor,'  just  as  below  (ver.  23)  the 
corresponding  phrase,  'vessels  of  mercy,'  is  made  prominent.  It 
should  be  observed  that  the  whole  verse  is  designed  to  assert  God's 
f\-eedom,  under  the  figure  of  the  potter  ;  hence  the  failure  of  all  at- 
tempts to  limit  the  application  to  the  Jews,  or  to  temporal  distinctions. 


158  ROMANS  IX.  [9:  22. 

22  What  if  God,  willing  *  to  shew  his  wrath,  and  to  make 
his  power  known,  endured  with  much  longsuifering 

*Add  marg.     Or,  although  voillitig. — Am.  Com. 

'  The  honor  and  dishonor  are  not  here  the  moral  jmrity  or  impurity  of 
the  human  vessels,  but  their  ultimate  glorification  or  perdition.  The 
Apostle,  in  asking  this  question,  rather  airas  at  striking  dumb  the 
objector  by  a  statement  of  God's  undoubted  right,  against  which  it 
does  not  become  us  to  murmur,  than  at  unfolding  to  us  the  actual  state 
of  the  case'  (Alford). 

Vers.  22-2y.  The  view  taken  of  these  verses  in  the  following  notes 
is  well  set  forth  in  the  paraphrase  of  Sunday  :  '  All  this  scheme  of  God  s 
dealings,  apparently  so  severs,  is  reallj-  most  merciful.  To  those  who 
really  deserved  His  wrath.  He  showed  long-suffering.  While  for  us, 
who  noAv  believe.  Gentiles  as  well  as  Jews,  Ha  had  mercy  and  glory  in 
store.  But  in  both  cases  the  final  result  was  strictly  in  accordance 
with  prophec}'.  Hosea  had  foretold  the  admission  of  the  Gentiles, 
Isaiah  the  exclusion  of  the  greater  part  of  the  Jews.' 

Ver,  22.  What  if  God.  The  construction  is  elliptical :  the  ori- 
ginal is  simply  :  '  but  if.'  We  may  supply,  as  follows  :  '  But  what  will 
be  said,  if,'  i.  e.,  How  can  the  objection  raised  be  urged,  if,  as  is  the 
case,  God,  etc. — WiUing,  etc.  The  participle  '  willing'  may  mean 
either,  '  since  He  is  willing,'  or,  '  although  He  is  willing.'  We  prefer 
the  latter  (see  R.  Y.  marg.,  Am.  Com.),  for  (1.)  the  former  view  gives 
to  'willing'  the  sense  of  'purposing,'  which  it  does  not  necessarily 
have;  (2.)  it  obscures  the  logical  relation  between  '  showing  wrath' 
and  'enduring'  ;  (3.)  it  relieves  somewhat  the  difficult  construction  of 
ver.  23.  On  this  view  '  willing'  refers  to  the  spontaneous  will  of  God, 
growing  out  of  His  moral  character,  not  to  His  fixed  purpose.  This 
would  lead  Him  to  shew  his  -wrath,  etc. — His  pow^er.  This  pe- 
culiar expression,  meaning  '  what  is  possible  to  Him,'  suits  the  view  we 
take  of  •  willing.' — Endured  with  much  long-suffering.  That 
the  Apostle  means  to  assert  the  fact  of  such  endurance  is  plain.  But 
how  does  this  stand  related  to  the  previous  clause  ?  Our  view  accepts 
a  contrast ;  *yet  He  endured;'  the  other  interpretation  makes  this 
the  result  of  His  purpose  to  show  His  wrath,  etc.  Thi^  raises  a  new 
difficulty,  while  the  former  explanation  really  answers  the  objection 
of  ver.  19,  by  showing  that  the  sovereign  God  had  withheld  the  exer- 
cise of  a  power  in  accordance  with  His  holy  will,  so  that  the  endur- 
ance was  really  '  with  much  long-suffering.'  Comp.  chap,  3  :  25. — 
Vessels  of  vvrath.  God's  wrath  is  meant,  and  these  vessels  are  to  be 
its  objects.  It  is  not  necessary  to  carry  out  the  figure  and  explain  a 
vessel  full  of  wrath.  This  phrase  is  suggested  by  the  corresponding 
one  in  ver.  21  ('vessel — unto  dishonor'). — Fitted  unto  destruc- 
tion ;  everlasting  destruction  is  meant,  as  the  contrasted  word 
('glory;'  ver.  23)  plainly  show's,  as  well  as  the  mention  of  God's  en- 
during with  much  long-suffering.  The  pai'ticiple,  '  fitted,'  expressed 
the  permanent  present  result  of  past  action.     It  is  not  said  that  God 


9:  23.]  ROMANS  IX.  159 

23  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  unto  destruction  :  ^  and  that  he 
might  make  known  the  riches  of  his  glory  upon  ves- 
sels  of  mercy,  which   he  afore  prepared  unto  glory, 

1  Some  ancient  authoiities  omit  and. 

has  fitted  them  for  destruction,  although  Meyer  thinks  this  is  implied. 
Others  think  that  they  are  represented  as  having  fitted  themselves  for 
destruction,  by  deserving  it.  Probably  the  mediate  agency  of  God  is 
not  to  be  excluded,  but  the  obvious  differences  between  the  two 
phrases  ('fitted  unto  destruction'  and  'which  He  afore  prepared  unto 
glory,'  see  below)  point  unmistakably  to  such  a  difference  as  should 
guard  the  passage  against  fatalistic  interpretations, 

Ver.  23.  And  that,  or,  '  also  that,'  in  order  that.  The  omission 
of  'and'  by  some  authorities  was  probably  due  to  an  effort  to  relieve 
the  difficult  construction.  The  simplest  view  is  to  translate  'also  that,' 
and  connect  the  verse  with  *  endured.'  Besides  His  great  long-suffer- 
ing toward  the  vessels  of  wrath.  He  had  another  purpose  in  the  endur- 
ance, one  with  reference  to  '  vessels  of  mercy.'  To  this  it  is  objected 
that  it  makes  the  purpose  in  reference  to  the  vessels  of  mercy  second- 
ary, but  in  our  view  the  long-suffering  suggests  the  thought  of  the 
revelation  of  God's  glory,  which  is  fully  carried  out  here.  Alford 
supplies  •  what  if  this  took  place,'  others  repeat  '  willing,'  which  is  in- 
admissible if  '  although  willing'  is  the  correct  explanation  in  ver.  22. 
To  join  this  verse  with  'fitted  unio  destruction 'gives  an  unwarranted 
sense.  Some  would  svipply  '  if,'  taking  this  verse  as  the  purpose  of 
the  calling  mentioned  in  ver.  24  ;  but  this  only  increases  the  gramma- 
tical difficulties.— The  riches  of  his  glory.  This  phrase,  which 
Godet  thinks  was  sucrgested  by  the  request  of  Moses  (comp.  ver.  15): 
'  Shew  me  thy  glory'  (Exod.  33  :  18),  refers  to  the  fulness  of  the  divine 
glory,  in  its  beneficence,  in  its  bestowal  of  blessing;  riches  of  'good- 
ness, grace,  mercy,  wisdom,  omnipotence'  (Bengel).  This  making 
known  is  something  which  occurs  throughout  the  gospel  dispensation, 
as  ver.  24  indicates.— On  vessels  of  mercy.  This  may  be  joined 
with  'make  known,'  or,  with  'riches'  ;  the  former  being  preferable. 
The  vessels  are  the  object  of  divine  mercy  in  every  age,  but  especially 
in  the  gospel  dispensation. — Which  he  afore  prepared.  The  verb 
does  not  mean  '  predestined,'  nor  is  it  to  be  explained  as  '  prepared  by 
providence  and  grace,'  since  the  latter  involves  a  process,  while  the 
tense  here  used  points  to  a  single  act,  which  takes  place  *  before'  these 
providential  and  gracious  dealings,  probably  referring  to  the  actual 
constitution  of  the  individual,  as  clay  in  the  hands  of  the  potter,  the 
result  of  election,  yet  distinct  from  it. — Unto  glory.  The  end  of  the 
preparation  is  the  possession  of  the  full  and  eternal  glory  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.  Alford  remarks,  that  the  theological  difficulties  here 
'  are  inherent  not  in  the  Apostle's  argument,  nor  even  in  revelation, 
but  in  any  consistent  belief  of  an  omnipotent  and  omniscient  God.' 
Yet,  the  variations  between  the  description  of  the  two  classes  are  so 


160  ROMANS  IX.  [9 ;  24,  25. 

24  even  us,  whom  he  also  called,  not  from  the  Jews  only, 

25  but  also  from  the  Gentiles?  As  he  saith  also  in  Hosea, 

I  will  call  that  mv  people,  which  was  not  my  people : 
And  her  beloved,  which  was  not  beloved. 

marked,  as  to  show  that  the  Apostle  distinguishes  between  God's 
agency  in  the  salvation  of  the  one  class  and  in  regard  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  other.  Two  diiferent  words  are  chosen  to  express  the  pre- 
paration ;  in  this  verse  we  have  '  before,'  which  is  wanting  in  ver.  22  ; 
hei*e  'He'  is  mentioned  as  preparing  the  objects  of  mercy,  there  the 
indefinite  passive  is  used;  here  a  single  act  (in  eternity)  is  spoken  of, 
there  a  process,  the  former  referring  to  the  beginning  of  a  develop- 
ment, the  latter  to  its  result.  These  differences  cannot  be  acci- 
dental. 

Ver.  24.  Even  us,  etc.  Or,  '  as  such  He  also  called  us.'  'Also,' 
(translated  '  even,'  in  the  A.  V.)  belongs  to  the  word  '  called,'  besides 
preparing.  He  also  called.  The  calling  is  that  of  individuals  through 
the  gospel. — Not  from  the  Jews  only,  etc.  '  The  believing  Jew 
is  not  called  as  such,  because  he  is  a  Jew,  but  fi'om  among  the  Jews ' 
(Bengel).  There  is  no  preference  shown  them.  '  How  naturally  does 
the  Apostle  here  return  to  the  main  subject  of  discussion.  How  skil- 
fully is  the  conclusion  brought  out  at  which  he  has  continually  aimed!' 
(Hodge.) 

Ver.  25.  As  he  saith  also  in  Hosea  (2:  23).  The  Hebrew  text 
is  here  followed  more  closely  than  the  L.XX.  What  has  just  been  said 
of  the  Gentiles  accords  with  ('as')  this  prophecy;  'also,'  probably, 
suggests  that  this  is  a  secondary  (or  typical)  application  of  the  passage, 
while  'Hosea'  refers  to  the  book,  as  in  our  usage.  Either  the  pro- 
phecy lays  down  a  general  principle  which  is  applicable  to  the  calling 
of  Gentiles,  or  it  may  be  claimed  that  its  primary  reference  was  typical 
of  this  later  event.  The  latter  is  more  accordant  with  Paul's  conceps, 
tion  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  with  the  peculiar  chai-acter  of  the  origi- 
nal prophecy. — I  will  call  that  my  people,  etc.  This  passage 
refers  to  the  fact  that  the  prophet  had  been  told  (Hos.  1  :  G,  9)  to  give 
to  a  daughter  and  a  son  the  names  Lo-Ruhnmah  (not  having  obtained 
mercy)  and  Lo-Ammi  (not  my  people).  The  form^•r  name  symbolized 
the  visible  deprivation  of  mercy,  the  latter  visible  rejection  as  a  people. 
The  Apostle  uses  the  LXX.  equivalent  of  these  names  ( '  nf>t  beloved  ' 
for  Lo-Ruhamah'),  inverting  the  order,  to  emphasize  the  thought  'not 
my  people,'  which  was  prominent  in  his  mind.  '  I  will  call '  is  sub- 
stituted for  '  I  will  say  to,'  without  altering  the  sense,  for  'calling' 
here  means  to  '  name,'  as  do  the  words  of  the  original  prophecy.  But 
undoubtedly  the  Apostle  in  this  applicaiiou  had  in  mind  the  calling  of 
the  Gentiles  to  salvation.  The  original  refevcDce  was  to  the  ten  tribes, 
not  to  the  heathen  ;  but  they  had  become  idolatrous,  and  any  typical 
significance  of  the  language  addressed  to  them  would  apply  to  the  re- 
ception of  the  Gentiles. 


9:  2o-28.]  ROMANS  IX.  161 

26  Aud  it  shall  be,  that  in  the  place  where  it  was  said 

unto  them,  Ye  are  not  my  people, 
There  shall  they  be  called  sons  of  the  living  God. 

27  And  Isaiah  crieth  concerning  Israel,  If  the  number  or 
the  children  of  Israel  be  as  the  sand  of  the  sea,  it  is 

28  the  remnant  that  shall  be  saved :  for  the  Lord  will 

Ver.  26.  And  it  shall  be,  etc.  This  is  the  latter  half  of  Hos.  1 : 
10,  which  is  closely  connected  in  thought  with  the  other  passage.  The 
only  variation  from  the  LXX.  is  the  strengthening  of  'also'  into 
'  there,'  a  word  supplied  in  Italics  in  the  A.  V.  of  the  prophecy. — In 
the  place,  etc.  Some  have  thought  that  the  prophet  meant  Palestine 
(Samaria),  to  which  the  ten  tribes  returned.  This  makes  Paul's  appli- 
cation of  this  part  of  the  prophecy  purely  typical.  Lange,  more  cor- 
rectly, finds  in  Hos.  1  :  11,  a  proof  that  the  expression  of  the  prophet 
denotes  the  stay  of  the  Jews  in  the  Gentile  world.  Others  explain  the 
phrase  as  referring  generally  to  the  heathen  world  ;  some,  as  meaning 
the  Christian  Church,  the  ideal  state,  etc. 

Ver.  27.  And  Isaiah  crieth  concerning  Israel.  To  the  pre- 
diction of  Hosea  which  is  applied  to  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles,  the 
Apostle  adds  another  which  presents  the  other  side,  namely,  that  few 
of  Israel  will  be  saved.  The  quotation,  extending  to  the  close  of  ver. 
28,  is  from  Isaiah  10:  22.  23,  the  verses  being,  however,  diflFerently 
divided.  The  original  reference  of  the  prophecy  was  to  the  return  of 
the  Jews  from  Babylon.  '  Crieth'  de.-cribes  'the  bold  declaration  of  a 
truth  very  offensive  to  the  people'  (Lange). — If  the  number,  etc. 
The  LXX.  is  followed,  which  varies  but  slightly  from  the  Hebrew. — 
Sand  of  the  sea.  Comp.  the  promi-es  to  Abraham  and  Jacob  (Gen. 
22  :  17  ;  32  :  1-4). — It  is  the  remnant.  Only  '  the  remnant,'  mainly 
with  a  reference  to  the  call  of  the  Gentiles,  but  probably  suggesting 
the  thought  of  the  future  salvation  of  Israel,  fully  brought  out  in  chap, 
11. — Shall  be  saved.  So  the  LXX.  renders  the  Hebrew  word: 
'  shall  return.'      P ml,  of  course,  applies  the  phrase  in  the  fullest  sense. 

Ver.  28.  This  verse  presents  unusual  difiiculties,  both  as  to  the 
Greek  text,  the  English  translation,  and  the  principle  of  citation  which 
led  the  Apostle  to  use  it. — The  weight  of  authority  supports  tlie  briefer 
reading,  although  that  reading  can  be  explained  as  due  to  an  oversight 
on  the  part  of  a  transcriber.  The  longer  reading  may  be  translated 
thus  :  '  For  he  (i.  e.,  the  Lord)  is  finishing  and  cutting  short  his  word 
in  righteousness,  because  a  short  (lit.,  cut-short)  word  will  the  Lord 
execute  upon  the  earth.'  This  longer  rea  ling  does  not  vary  materially 
from  the  LXX,  ;  hence  it  may  have  been  enlarged  to  correspond  with 
that.  But  the  variations  from  the  Hebrew  are  considerable,  as  may  be 
seen  from  the  following  translation  : — 

'  Consumption  (extirpation)  is  decided,  flowing  with  righteousness  j 
For  a  consumption  and  decree  shall  the  Lord  of  hosts  make, 
In  the  midit  of  all  the  land.' 

11 


162  ROMANS  IX.  [9:  29. 

execute  his  word  upon  the  earth,  finishing  it  and  cut- 
29  ting  it  short.     And,  as  Isaiah  hath  said  before, 
Except  the  Lord  of  Sabaoth  had  left  us  a  seed, 

The  question  is  whether  the  LXX.  has  varied  from  the  meaning  of 
tlie  original  prophecy  as  well  as  from  its  form.  We  think  that  the 
LXX.,  especially  as  here  applied  by  the  Apostle,  has  preserved  most 
fully  the  thought  of  the  original  prophecy,  in  fact  conveying  it  to  the 
mind  of  a  reader  familiar  with  Greek  more  clearly  than  could  have 
been  done  by  a  literal  rendering  of  the  Hebrew. — For  is  inserted  by 
the  Apostle  to  strengthen  the  connection. — The  Lord  will  execute 
his  word  (not,  'work,'  as  in  the  A.  V.).  The  Greek  word  has  been 
rendered  '  decree,'  to  correspond  more,  closely  with  the  Hebrew,  but 
this  is  not  its  meaning,  though  the  idea  of  such  a  decree  underlies 
Paul's  use  of  the  passage.  '  Word '  is  preferable,  i.  e.,  a  word  of  prom- 
ise and  threatening  (to  the  remnant  and  the  mass  respectively).  Others 
prefer  in  view  of  the  reference  to  numbers,  to  translate  '  make  a  reck- 
oning,' instead  of  '  execute  a  word,'  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  the 
phrase  has  this  meaning.  'Ilis'  is  properly  supplied  in  English. — 
Finishing  it  and  cutting  it  short.  Describing  the  rapid  accom- 
plishment of  the  word  uttered  by  the  Lord.  Which  reading  being  ac- 
cepted, it  seems  best  to  i-efer  the  verse  to  both  the  threatening  and  the 
promise.  Some  have  interpreted  the  Avhole  of  God's  mercy,  of  His 
cutting  short  judgment.  But  this  explanation  gives  to  '  righteousness ' 
the  sense  of  mercy.  Moreover  it  is  foreign  to  the  Hebrew,  and  quite 
inappropriate  here,  where  the  Apostle  is  emphasizing  the  fact  that  onlj/ 
a  remnant  will  be  saved.  The  fathers  had  the  fantastic  notion  that  the 
'  short  word '  is  '  the  gospel  as  an  abridged  doctrine  of  salvation,  in 
antithesis  to  the  elaborateness  of  the  Old  Testament.'  Other  fanciful 
interpretations  are  only  too  numerous.  While  the  original  reference  was 
to  the  .Jews  in  the  time  of  Isaiah,  the  Apostle  here  makes  a  prophecy 
of  more  general  validity,  applying  it  to  the  sad  fact,  discussed  in  this 
part  of  the  Epistle,  that  most  of  the  Jews  were  cut  off,  but  including 
the  other  fact  that  the  remnant  should  be  saved.  Both  points  are 
closely  connected  with  the  great  thought  of  this  section,  the  freedom 
of  God  in  election,  and  this  application  does  no  violence  to  the  original 
sense  of  the  prophecy. 

Ver.  29.  And,  as  Isaiah  hath  said  before,  or,  'beforehand.' 
The  punctuation  we  adopt,  involves  this  explanation  of  the  passage: 
'And,  even  as  Isaiah  has  pi-edicted  (so  I  repeat  his  words).  Except,' 
etc.  Another  view  explains:  'And  (it  is)  as  Isaiah  has  predicted.' 
The  former  is  preferable,  since  Paul  is  thus  preparing  the  way  for  his 
own  prophetic  utterances  in  chap.  11.  'Before'  can  scarcely  refer  to 
the  place  of  the  passage  in  the  Book  of  Isaiah,  since  this  is  a  matter 
of  no  importance  in  this  connection.  The  rendering  '  beforehand  '  in- 
dicates that  this  was  said  before  the  fultilment. — Except  the  Lord 
of  Sabaoth,  etc.     The  Septuagint  version  of  Isa.  1 :  9  is  cited  word 


9:  30.]  ROMANS  IX.  163 

We  had  become  as  Sodom,  and  had  been  made  like 
unto  Gomorrah. 

Chapter  9:  30-33. 

The  Jews  excluded  through  their  Unbelief. 

30      What  shall  we  say  then  ?    That  the  Gentiles,  which 
followed  not  after  righteousness,  attained  to  righteous- 

for  word — Seed.  So  the  LXX.  renders  the  Hebrew  word,  meaning 
'  remnant,'  which  occurs  in  the  original  prophecy.  This  suggests  an 
idea  found  in  Isa.  6  :  18  (comp.  Ezra  9:2),  that  the  remnant  should 
be  '  a  holy  seed.'  In  fact,  the  .Jewish  Christians,  who  escaped  the 
judgment  which  fell  on  their  nation  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
constituted  such  a  seed  for  the  Christian  Church. — .Become  is  proper- 
ly substituted  for  '  been.' — As  regards  the  application  made  by  Paul  of 
this  prophecy,  it  will  seem  all  the  more  appropriate  when  the  full  scope 
of  the  original  prediction  is  considered.  '  The  prophet  with  a  few 
ground-strokes  gathers  up  the  whole  future  of  the  people  of  Israel. 
He  announces  a  period  of  judgment  as  an  unavoidable  passage  way; 
then,  again,  a  time  of  salvation.  But  the  period  of  judgment  compre- 
hends in  itself  all  the  judgments  then  standing  without  as  yet:  every 
visitation,  of  which  histoi-y  from  that  time  on  knows  aughr,  is  a  proof 
of  this  word  of  prophecy,  a  fulfilmert  of  it.  .  .  .  Just  so  is  the  period 
of  salvation  conceived  as  the  sum-total  of  all  fulfilment  in  general, 
since  the  complete  realization  of  all  God's  promises  will  bring  what 
will  still  all  the  longing  and  the  thirsting  of  the  human  heart  from 
thenceforth  and  forever'  (Dreschler).  With  this  thought  of  the  reju- 
venation of  Israel,  through  a  remnant  which  is  also  a  germ,  the  Apos- 
tle passes  to  the  other  side  of  the  dark  problem,  namely,  the  unbelief 
of  the  Jews  as  the  human  cause  of  their  rejection.  This  phase  of  the 
subject  is  introduced  in  ver.  uO,  with  which,  therefore,  we  begin 
another  section. 

Chapters  9:  30—10:  21. 

2.  Man's  Responsibility;  the  Jews  excluded  through  their  own 
Unbelief. 
For  convenience  we  may  divide  this  passage  into  two  sections  :  (i.)  Chap.  9  :  30-33 
Bet8  forth  the  fact  that  the  Jews  had  not  attained  to  righteousness  because  they  re- 
jected God's  way  of  attaining  it,  namely,  by  faith.  The  responsibility  for  their  rejec- 
tion therefore  re:>ts  upon  themselves.  (  i.)  The  Apostle  proceeds  to  lay  emphasis 
upon  this  position,  by  proving  that  the  Old  Testament  itself  pointed  to  Christ  as  the 
end  of  the  law,  and  to  faith  as  the  one  way  and  the  universal  way  of  salvation ;  hence 
the  unbelief  of  the  Jews,  in  spite  of  the  many  prophetic  warnings,  left  them  without 
excuse,  as  a  disobedient  and  gainsaying  people  ;  chap.  10 ;  1-21. 


164  ROMANS  IX.  [9 :  31. 

31  ness,  even  the  righteousness  which   is  of  faith  :  but 
Israel,  following  after  a  law  of  righteousness,  did  not 

I.   The  Jeivs  excluded  through  their   Uabehef,  vers.  30-33. 

The  Gentiles  were  saved,  the  Jews  failed  of  salvation  (vers.  30,  31  j ;  but  the  latter 
fact  was  due  to  their  seeking  rigbteou'^ness,  not  by  faith,  but  as  by  works  (ver.  32) ; 
they  took  offence  at  Christ,  who  is  a  stone  of  stumbling  to  unbelievers,  as  well  as  an 
object  of  faith  (ver.  33). 

Ver.  30.  What  shall  we  say  then  ?  Precisely  as  in  ver.  14, 
where,  however,  it  introduces  an  objection.  But  Avhen  followed  by 
an  assertion,  it  further  unfolds  an  argument  from  what  precedes. 
Here  it  introduces  a  summing  up  of  '  the  historical  result  from  the 
foregoing  prophecies'  (Meyer),  yet  with  a  view  to  present  a  new 
phase  of  the  subject.  What  he  would  say  is  that  'Gentiles,'  etc. — 
The  Gentiles.  The  article  is  wanting,  and  should  not  be  inserted 
in  English  ;  what  is  affirmed  is  true  of  Gentiles,  but  not  of  the  Gen- 
tiles as  a  whole. — Which  followed  not  (or,  '  who  were  not  follow- 
ing') after  righteousness.  '  Pursuing,'  as  in  running  for  a  prize. 
This  'prize'  which  the  Gentiles  did  not  pursue  was  'righteousness.' 
While  this  word  does  not  mean  'justification,'  we  need  not  give  it 
here  a  purely  ethical  sense.  For  some  of  the  Gentiles  had  a  high 
ethical  ideal  which  they  pursued.  But  they  did  not  follow  this  ethical 
aim  with  the  thought  of  attaining  a  verdict  of  righteousness  before 
God.  Conformity  to  His  law  was  not  their  ideal  of  virtue,  nor  was 
His  judgment  the  ultimate  ground  of  acceptance.  Thus  much  we  may 
understand,  both  fiom  Paul's  previous  discussions,  and  from  what 
follows. — Attained  to  righteousness.  The  verb  is  used  of  laying 
hold  of  the  prize  in  the  Grecian  games.  Here  the  technical  Christian 
sense  of  '  righteousness,'  righteousness  from  God  (chap.  1:  17),  seems 
necessary. — Even  the  righteousness  w^hich  is  of  faith.  The 
peculiar  form  of  the  original  suggests  that  this  is  the  true  righteous- 
ness. 

Ver.  31.  But  Israel,  following  after  a  law  of  righteousness. 
Evidently  the  Mos:iic  law.  Here,  however,  it  is  described  as  a  law 
which  affords  righteousness.  Israel  pursued  this  law  in  order  that 
justification  might  ensue,  but  without  any  true  sense  of  its  contents, 
or  real  apprehension  of  its  mission  (comp  chap.  10:  4).  Others  ex- 
plain the  phrase  as  'righteousness  of  the  law,'  which  is  ungrammati- 
cal,  while  some,  without  good  reason,  explain  'law'  in  the  general 
sense  of  rule. — Did  not  arrive  at  that  la^v.  The  word  'arrive'  is 
here  substituted  for  'attain'  (ver.  30),  and  the  best  authorities  omit 
'of  righteousness,'  which  would  naturally  be  inserted  by  the  trans- 
cribers, to  make  the  sense  more  obvious.  The  omission  makes  impos- 
sible that  (otherwise  objectionable)  explanation  of  the  verse,  which 
takes  'law'  here  as  'the  law  of  faith,'  and  in  the  previous  clause  as 
'  the  law  of  Moses.'  The  better  view  is  :  they  did  not  even  arrive  at 
the  real  inward  character  of  that  law,  which  they  pursued  as  affording 


9:  32,33.]  ROMANS  IX.  165 

32  arrive  at  that  law.     Wherefore  ?    ^  Because  they  sought 
it  not  by  faith,  but  as  it  were  by  works.     They  stum- 

33  bled  at  the  stone  of  stumbling ;  even  as  it  is  written, 

Behold,  I  lay  in  Zion  a  stone  of  stumbling  and  a 

rock  of  offence  : 
And  he  that  belie veth  on  ^  him  shall  not  be  put  to 

shame. 

1  Or,  Because,  doing  it  not  by  faith,  but  as  it  were  bij  icorks,  they  stumbled.  2  Or,  it. 

righteousness.  They  arrived  at  the  letter,  but  not  at  the  meaning  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  for  the  law,  rightly  understood,  would  have  led  them 
to  Christ. 

Ver.  32.  "Wherefore  ?  Why  did  they  fail  to  arrive  at  that  law, 
which  they  yet  pursued  as  affording  righteousness. — Because  they 
sought  it  not  by  faith.  The  words  'they  sought  it'  are  properly 
supplied.  '  Had  they  started  from  faith  in  their  striving,  they  would 
have  obtained  in  Christianity  the  realization  of  their  endeavor'  (Mey- 
er). They  would  have  arrived  at  the  law,  in  its  real  sense,  and  it 
would  have  become  to  them  a  'law  of  righteousness''  Comp.  chap. 
10:  4.  Here  the  Apostle  distinctly  asserts  that  the  Jews  were  them- 
selves responsible  for  their  position,  and  the  general  principle  which 
is  involved  here,  is  implied  in  every  other  passage  of  Scripture  which 
bears  upon  the  awful  problem.  The  same  principle,  or  fact,  is  asserted 
in  those  doctrinal  statements  which  lay  the  greatest  emphasis  upon 
God's  sovei-eignty;  see  Lange,  Romans,  pp.  329,  330,  and  comp.  Hodge, 
Shedd,  and  others  in  Zoco.— But  as  it  were  by  "works.  They  im- 
agined they  were  doing  the  Avorks  of  the  law,  while  really  they  failed 
to  do  them,  because  they  did  not  apprehend  the  purpose  of  the  law, 
nor  the  spirit  in  which  its  requirements  should  be  met. — They  stum- 
bled. 'For'  is  properly  omitted.  The  R.  V.  marg.  joins  this  closely 
with  what  precedes  ;  but  this  view  disturbs  the  relation  to  '  wherefore? ' 
and  is  far  less  striking. — At  the  stone  of  stumbling ;  to  which 
repeated  reference  is  made  in  Scripture:  see  below  on  ver.  33. 
That  Christ  Himself  is  meant  is  evident  from  the  New  Testament  ap- 
plication (if  the  phrase.  The  figure  is  very  appropriate  to  the  previous 
notion  of  following  (vers.  30,  31).  'Offence  at  Christ  is  culpable;  it 
is  taken  not  given  '  (Heubner). 

Ver.  33.  Even  as  it  is  -written,  etc.  Two  passages  from  Isaiah 
are  here  combined. — Stone  of  stumbling,  etc.  In  Isa.  8:  14,  God 
Himself  is  represented  as  being  '  for  a  stone  of  stumbling  and  for  a 
rock  of  offence'  to  His  enemies.  This  was  properly  applied  to  the 
Messiah  by  the  Jews,  and  to  our  Lord  by  the  Apostle.  But  he  substi- 
tutes these  expressions  for  similar  ones  in  Isa.  28  :  16,  where  the  figure 
of  a  corner-stone  occurs,  applied  by  both  Peter  and  Paul  to  Christ. 
This  combination  is  both  justifiable  and  natural.  In  both  cases  the 
supreme  revelation  of  Jehovah  in  the  Messiah  is  referred  to ;  in  one 


166  ROMANS  X.  [10:  1. 

Chapter  10:  1-21. 

Proof  that  the  Jews  were  Excluded  through  their  Unbelief. 

1      Brethren,  my  heart's  ^  desire  and  my  supplication  to 

1  Gr.  good  pleasure. 

passage  as  a  sanctuary  for  His  people,  but  for  a  stone  of  stumbling, 
etc.,  to  His  enemies  ;  in  the  oilier  as  a  corner-stone  laid  in  Zion,  for  a 
secure  foundation.— He  that  believeth,  etc.  In  chap.  10:  11  this 
clause  is  introduced  again,  but  there  'whosoever'  occurs,  which  is  to 
be  omitted  here,  according  to  the  best  authorities.  In  the  LXX.  it  is 
not  f:uud  ;  nor  could  it  be  emphatic  here,  since  the  antithesis  to 
'stumbled '  makes  '  believeth  '  the  prominent  word.  -  On  him,  or,  '  it' 
(R.  V.  marg.).  The  Greek  pronoun  may  be  either  masculine  or  neuter. 
But  the  Messianic  reference  is  better  indicated  by  the  rendering  '  Him.* 
— Shall  not  be  put  to  shame.  The  Hebrew  is  :  '  shall  not  make 
haste,'  or,  'flee  hastily,'  with  a  primary  reference  to  escaping  from 
danger,  but  the  LXX.,  from  which  Paul  varies  very  slightly,  gives  the 
meaning  with  substantial  correctness  (comp.  'confounded'  in  the 
margin  of  the  A.  V.).  This  negative  promise  is  rightly  regarded  as 
implying  a  positive  blessing.  'As  though  he  had  said  :  Because  Christ 
is  called  the  stone  of  stumbling,  there  is  no  reason  that  we  should 
dread  Him,  for  He  is  appointed  for  life  to  believers'  (Calvin). 

II.  Proof  that  the  Jewe  were  Excluded  through  their  Unbelief,  vers.  1-21. 

The  section  may  be  divided  into  four  paragraphs  : 

The  Jews  with  their  religious  zeal  failed  to  recognize  (1.)  Christ  as  the  end  of  the 
law  (vers.  1-4) ;  (2.)  the  gratuitous  character  of  salvation  (vers.  5-11);  (3.)  the  uni- 
versal character  of  salvation  (vers.  12-18) ;  and  (4.)  all  of  these  things  together  with 
their  rebellion  had  been  prophesied  (vers.  19-21).  The  last  paragraph  contains  the 
direct  application  to  the  .lews.  '  They  could  not  excuse  themselves  by  this,  that  God 
had  not  done  His  part  to  make  humanity  know  the  gospel,  or  that  it  had  not  reached 
them,  or  that  they  could  not  haye  seen  what  their  conduct  in  regard  to  it  and  God^s 
dealings  with  the  Gentiles  would  be'  (Tholuck). 

The  argument  is  very  concise,  sometimes  obscure,  but  there  is  general  agreement 
that  the  responsibility  of  the  Jews  is  proven  from  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  which 
point  to  salvation  in  Christ  as  by  faith  and  hence  universal,  sp  that  unbelief  is  the 
ground  of  rejection.  The  evangelical  purpose  of  the  Old  Testament  is  implied 
throughout,  and  the  Scripture  citations  assume  that  '  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law ' 
(ver.  4)  in  its  typical  and  prophetical  significance. 

The  section  opens  with  an  expression  of  Paul's  affection  for  his  nation,  an  echo  of 
chap.  9:  1-5,  and  with  his  testimony  to  their  religious  zeal, which,  however,  did  not 
prevent  them  from  refusing  Christ  and  His  gratuitous  and  universal  salvation,  offered 
to  all  who  believe.  Despite  their  zeal,  their  unbelief  muse  exclude  them.  The  argu- 
ment is  carried  out  without  any  reference  to  the  supposed  conflict  with  the  position 
taken  in  chap.  9  :  6-29. 

Ver.  1.     Brethren.     This  term  of  affection,  though  not  addressed 


10 :  2,  3.]  ROMANS  X.  167 

2  God  is  for  them,  that  they  may  be  saved.     For  I 
bear  them  witness  that  they  have  a  zeal  for  God,  but 

3  not  according  to  knowledge.     For  being  ignorant   of 
God's  righteousness,  and  seeking   to  establish    their 

to  Jewish  readers,  was  probably  not  suggested  by  Paul's  feeling  to- 
ward them  ;  his  severity  was  consistent  with  love  ;  comp.  chap.  9:  1, 
etc.,  1  Cor.  9:  20;  Gal.  3 :  15.— My  heart's  desire,  lit.,  'good 
pleasure,'  not  'good  will;'  the  latter  sense  does  not  suit  the  context, 
'  Desire '  is  not  exact,  yet  probably  suggests  the  true  sense  :  the  sal- 
vation of  Israel  was  the  ideal  of  his  heart  (Godet).  A  Greek  particle 
occurs  here,  which  implies  that  this  verse  presents  the  first  member  of 
a  contrast ;  the  corresponding  word  is  not  found  in  what  follows,  but 
the  contrasted  thought  is  evidently  expressed  in  ver.  3. — And  my 
supplication  to  God  is  for  them.  The  word  '  Israel '  is  poorly 
supported,  and  was  substituted  for  'them,'  as  an  explanatory  gloss, 
since  a  church  lesson  began  here.  The  correct  reading  shows  the  in- 
timate connection  of  thought  with  the  close  of  chap.  9. — That  they 
might  be  saved;  lit.,  'unto  salvation.'  Their  salvation  is  the  end 
(ideal)  of  his  '  good  pleasure,'  and  this  he  asks  God  to  grant.  The 
mixture  of  these  two  ideas  need  occasion  no  difficulty  when  it  is  re- 
membered that  in  the  New  Testament  the  combined  purpose  and  pur- 
port of  prayers  are  usually  introduced  by  the  word  meaning  '  in  order 
that.' 

Ver.  2.  For  I  bear  them  witness.  The  reason  for  his  desire 
and  prayer  is  the  fact  to  which  he  now  bears  his  testimony. — They 
have  a  zeal  for  God,  i.  e.,  of  which  God  is  the  object,  not  great 
zeal,  or,  godly  zeal.  Their  zeal  was  religious,  conscientious,  but  mis- 
directed.— But  not  according  to  knowledge.  The  word  often 
means  full  knowledge,  and  is  here  used  to  denote  correct,  vital  know- 
ledge. Answering  to  the  objective  advantages  of  the  Jews  (chap.  9: 
1-5)  was  this  religious  zeal,  which  degenerated  into  blind  fanaticism. 
But  this,  we  infer  frcJm  the  passage,  is  better  than  indiflFerentism. 
Where  there  is  some  earnestness,  there  is  something  to  hope  for.  In 
this  respect  the  condition  of  many  in  Christian  lands  is  less  encourag- 
ing than  that  of  the  .lews  in  Paul's  time. 

Ver.  3.  For.  In  vers.  3,  4,  we  have  the  proof  from  fact,  that 
their  religious  zeal  was  '  not  according  to  knowledge.'  The  thought, 
however,  i=;  in  contrast  with  ver.  1,  as  already  indicated. — Being  ig- 
norant of.  There  is  a  verbal  correspondence  with  '  knowledge '  in 
the  original.  We  need  not  press  the  phrase  so  far  as  to  render  it 
'mistaking,'  or  'overlooking.' — God's  righteousness,  as  through- 
out the  Epistle,  '  that  ri^-hteousness  which  avails  before  God,  which 
becomes  ours  in  justification'  (Alford).— Seeking  to  establish  their 
o^wn.  '  Righteousness '  is  probably  to  be  omitted  in  this  clause,  al- 
tliough  the  evidence  is  nearly  evenly  balanced.  '  Striving  '  suggests 
that  they  would  acquire  what  according  to  God's  method  of  salvation 


168  ROMANS  X.  [10:  4,  5. 

own,  they  did  not  subject  themselves  to  the  righteous- 

4  ness  of  God.     For  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  unto 

5  righteousness  to  every  one  that  believeth.     For  Moses 
writeth  that   the  man  that  doeth   the  righteousness 

•was  to  be  bestowed,  while  'establish'  or,  '  set  up,'  suggests  the  pride  of 
their  endeavor. — Did  not  subject  themselves,  etc.  the  veib  is 
not  passive,  but  middle ;  for  the  former  would  indicate  merely  the  his- 
torical result,  while  the  latter  points  to  their  personal  guilt,  a  thought 
better  suited  to  the  context,  and  bringing  out  the  implied  contrast 
with  ver.  1. — The  righteousness  of  God  ;  here  '  conceived  of  as 
a  divine  ordinance,  to  which  one  submits  ones  self,  through  faith' 
(Meyer),  as  the  context  plainly  indicates. 

Ver.  4.  For  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law.  The  emphatic  word 
is  '  end';  its  meaning,  however,  U  open  to  discussion.  Explanations  : 
(1.)  Christ  is  the  object,  or  aim,  of  the  law.  This  may  be  expanded 
in  two  ways:  (a.)  The  end  of  the  law  was  to  make  men  righteous, 
and  this  was  accomplished  in  Christ;  hence  the  Jews  by  rejecting 
Him  did  not  submit  themselves,  etc.  (6.)  The  end  of  the  law  was  to 
lead  to  Him,  hence  by  stumbling  at  Him,  while  seeking  their  own 
righteousness,  they  did  not  submit  themselves,  etc.  The  two  may  be 
combined;  each  of  them  preserves  the  force  of  'for,'  as  a  proof  of 
ver.  3.  (2.)  Christ  is  the  fulfilment  of  the  law.  This,  which  is  true 
enough,  does  not  meet  the  requirements  of  this  passage.  (3.)  Christ 
is  the  termination,  conclusion,  of  the  law.  So  many  commentators, 
among  them  Meyer,  who  paraphrases  :  'for  in  Christ  the  validity  of 
the  law  has  come  to  an  end,  that  inghteousness  should  become  the 
portion  of  every  one  who  believes.'  This  'chronological'  view  has 
much  to  recommend  it,  especially  the  fact  that  there  is  such  a  sharp 
contrast  made  in  vers.  5,  6,  between  the  law  and  Christ.  On  the  other 
hand  we  may  ask  why  should  Paul  quote  from  the  law,  if  it  had  lost 
its  validity  ?  This  view,  moreover,  does  not  furnish  so  strong  a  proof 
of  the  position  of  ver.  3,  as  (1.)  which  is,  on  the  whole,  the  prefer- 
able explanation. — Unto  righteousness  to  every  one  that 
believeth.  If  '  end '  is  here  taken  in  the  sense  of  '  aim,'  then 
'  unto'  expresses  the  result ;  if  it  means  '  conclusion,'  then  this  clause 
indicates  i\xQ  purpose  of  the  abrogation  of  the  legal  system.  The  em- 
phasis here  rests  on  'believeth,'  since  it  was  thus  that  men  submitted 
themselves  to  the  righteousness  of  God  (ver.  3). 

Ver.  5.  For.  Here  the  Apostle  enters  upon  a  proo^  from  the  Old 
Testament  of  his  position  that  the  one  way  of  salvation  is  by  faith 
(vers.  5-11  j.  He  cites  the  law  against  the  law  as  a  way  of  obtaining 
righteousness.  Other  citations  follow,  in  support  of  similar  positions. 
But  this  verse,  in  itself  is  a  direct  proof  of  ver.  4.  (Weiss  regards  it  as 
a  proof  that  the  zeal  of  the  Jews  was  '  not  according  to  knowledge '). — 
Moses  -writeth  that  the  man  that  doeth  the  righteousness 
which  is   of  the  law  shall  live  thereby.     The  R.  V.  follows 


10;  6.]  ROMANS  X.  169 

6  which    is   of   the  law  shall   live   thereby.     But   the 

the  text  which  seems  to  be  better  established.  The  critical  questions, 
however,  are  not  only  numerous,  but  difficult  to  decide.  The  author- 
ity of  the  Sinaitic  manuscript  has  turned  the  scale  in  regard  to  the 
following  readings:  'that'  to  be  placed  immediately  after  'writeth;' 
'these  things'  to  be  omitted;  'thereby'  (lit.,  'in  it ')  referring  to 
'  righteousness,'  to  be  substituted  for  '  by  (lit.,  in)  them.'  The  accep- 
tance of  these  changes  alters  the  construction,  as  indicated  above. 
The  received  text  conforms  more  closely  to  the  LXX.  (Lev.  18  :  5), 
wliich  is  an  argument  against  it.  In  Gal.  3  :  12,  where  the  Apostle 
quotes  the  same  passage,  the  variations  are  slight,  although  'man'  is 
to  be  omitted  there,  while  it  is  retained  here  (as  in  the  LXX.).  It 
will  appear  then  that  the  Apostle  interprets  the  passage,  instead  of 
citing  it  directly,  and  his  interpretation  is  obviously  correct. — The 
man  that  doeth.  The  participle  sums  up  the  obedience  as  one  act, 
which  is  the  condition  of  '  living  ;'  the  starting-point  is  not  faith,  but 
the  exact  and  full  performance  of  that  which  the  law  requires,  which 
the  Apostle  here  terms:  the  righteousness  -which  is  of  the  la-w. 
It  is  implied,  but  not  directly  asserted,  that  no  one  had  thus  fultilled 
it. — Shall  live  thereby  (lit.,  '  in  it '),  ?.  e.,  in  this  righteousness,  'it 
will  be  the  means  of  salvation  and  life  for  him  who  really  does  the 
law'  ((Godet).  It  has  been  maintained  that  'live,'  in  Lev.  18:  5,  and 
similar  Old  Testament  passages,  refers  only  to  temporal  prosper- 
ity, but  even  the  Jewish  interpreters  included  more,  and  certainly 
'life'  in  the  New  Testament  has  an  exalted  meaning.  Since  the  Apos- 
tle implies  that  the  higher  obedience  and  consequently  the  higher 
reward  were  unattainable,  it  has  been  urged  that  Moses  could  not 
have  seemingly  proposed  any  such  meaning  as  is  here  involved.  But 
this  either  dwarfs  the  moral  scope  of  the  law,  or  puts  it  in  a  false  posi- 
tion ;  for  the  law,  although  made  by  the  Jews  merely  an  expression 
of  the  condition  of  a  legal  righteousness,  was  far  more  than  this :  it 
led  to  Christ  (comp.  ver.  4;  Gal.  3  :  19-25).  The  antithesis  between 
vers.  5  and  6  is  relative,  not  absolute.  Even  the  doing  and  living,  so 
far  as  they  became  a  reality,  pointed  to  Christ,  who  by  His  vicarious 
doing  and  living  makes  us  live  and  do. 

Vere.  6-8.  The  language  from  '  Say  not  in  thy  heart'  (ver.  6)  to 
'in  thy  heart'  (ver,  8),  is  that  of  Moses  in  Deut.  30:  12-14,  accord- 
ing to  the  LXX.,  with  variations  and  interpolated  explanations.  The 
question  then  arises  :  How  are  we  to  understand  Paul's  use  of  the  pas- 
sage? Three  answers  have  been  given  :  (1.)  as  an  interpretation  of  the 
deeper  sense  of  the  original  passage ;  (2.)  as  an  employment  of  it  in  a 
new  sense  ;  (3.)  as  an  application  of  the  general  principle  underlying 
the  words  of  Moses.  Of  these  views  we  decidedly  prefer  the  first, 
urging  in  favor  of  it  the  following  considerations  :  {a.)  Paul  is  proving 
that  '  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  for  righteousness,'  etc.  If  that 
means,  as  we  hold,  the  aim,  or  object,  of  the'law,  then  it  is  natural  that 
the  Apostle  would  use  the  law  itself  to  prove  it.     {b.)  The  contrast  is 


170  ROMANS  X.  [10:  6. 

righteousness  which  is  of  faith  saith  thus,  Say  not  in 
thy  heart,  Who  shall  ascend  into  heaven  ?  (that  is,  to 

not  between  '  the  righteousness  of  faith '  and  '  Moses,'  but  between  the 
former  and  'the  righteousness  which  is  of  the  law'  (ver.  5),  and  the 
correct  reading  only  makes  this  contrast  the  sharper.  Hence  we  may 
expect  to  find  here  what  Moses  writes  respecting  the  righteousness  by 
faith  over  against  what  he  has  written  of  the  righteousness  of  the  law. 
But  if  this  is  an  adaptation  or  application,  the  words  derive  no  enforce- 
ment from  Moses,  (c.)  As  ver.  5  stands  in  the  received  text,  it  appears 
to  be  a  direct  verbal  citation.  But  the  correct  reading  shows  that  the 
words  of  Moses  are  used  in  the  same  free  manner  both  in  that  verse 
and  in  vers.  6-8.  Hence  it  cannot  be  argued  that  Paul  cites  in  the 
one  case,  and  adapts,  or  applies,  in  the  other,  (d).  It  is  unlikely  that 
Paul  would  argue  respecting  the  case  of  the  Jews,  from  their  own 
Scriptures,  and  give  the  language  a  meaning  that  was  not,  at  least, 
typically  involved  in  the  primary  sense,  (e.)  This  interpretation  is 
neither  far-fetched  nor  forced.  The  words  of  Moses  referred  to  the 
law,  that  very  law  the  end  of  which  was  Christ.  When  viewed  as  a 
thing  to  be  done  (ver.  5),  it  did  not  lead  to  Christ;  viewed  as  a  reve- 
lation, intelligible  and  accessible,  leading  to  trust  in  God  then  (comp. 
Deut.  30:)  and  more  fully  to  faith  in  the  Christ  when  He  had  come, 
the  words  of  Moses  respecting  it  had  as  their  deepest  meaning  a  refer- 
ence to  Christ :  '  if  spoken  of  the  law  as  a  manifestation  of  God  in  man's 
heart  and  mouth,  much  more  were  they  spoken  of  Him,  who  is  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh,  the  end  of  the  law  and  the  prophets'  (Alfoi-d). 
(/).  This  view  preserves  both  the  connection  and  the  contrast  between 
the  law  and  the  gospel,  and  thus  accords  with  chap.  9:  31  ('did  not 
arrive  at  that  law  '),  and  with  the  whole  sweep  of  Paul's  argument. 
Accepting  this  view,  we  extend  the  application  of  '  Moses  writeth ' 
(ver.  5)  to  the  whole  passage.  '  The  righteousness  which  comes  from 
faith  is  personified  (comp.  Heb.  12:  5),  so  that  tlie  following  words  of 
Moses,  in  which  Paul  recognizes  an  allegoricaUy  and  typically  prophetic 
description  of  this  righteousness,  appear  as  its  self-description'  (Meyer^. 
The  objections  to  the  other  views  will  be  readily  inferred  from  what 
has  been  said.  Both  of  them  grow  out  of  a  failure  to  recognize  the 
true  validity  of  the  law  (and  of  the  Mosaic  economy)  as  leading  to 
Christ,  and  make  too  sharp  a  contrast  between  law  and  gospel  (rather 
than  between  '  doing '  and  'believing').  Moreover,  whatever  empha- 
sis is  laid  on  the  position  that  Paul  bases  his  argument  upon  the  prin- 
ciple which  underlies  the  words  of  Moses,  is  in  reality  a  concession  to 
the  view  we  have  advocated.  To  deny  any  such  agreement  in  prin- 
ciple seems  to  deny  honesty  to  the  Apostle's  argument.  For  conve- 
nience we  append  a  literal  rendering  of  the  entire  passage  (Deut.  30: 
11-14)  from  the  LXX. 

11.  Because  this  commandment,  which  I  command  thee  this  day,  is  not  exalted  (out 
of  reach),  nor  is  it  far  from  thee.  12.  It  is  not  in  the  heaven  above,  saying,  Who  shall 
ascend  for  us  into  the  heaven,  and  bring  it  to  us,  and  hearing  it  we  will  do  ii  ?    13, 


10:  7.]  ROMANS  X.  171 

7  bring  Christ  down  :)  or,  AVho  shall  descend  into  the 
abyss?  (that  is,  to  bring  Christ  up  from  the  dead.) 

Nor  is  it  beyond  the  sea  saying,  ^Tio  shall  pass  through  to  beyond  the  sea  and  may 
bring  it  for  us,  and  may  make  it  heard,  and  we  will  do  it  ?  14.  Very  nigh  thee  is  the 
word,  in  thy  mouth,  and  in  thy  heart,  and  thy  hands  to  do  it. 

Yer.  6.      But   the   righteousness   -which   is   of  faith.      As 

already  indicated,  'but'  introduces  a  contrast  -with  the  other  '  right- 
eousness' of  doing  (ver.  5).  The  personification  is  quite  jiatural. — 
Saith  thus;  not,  '  speaketh,'  which  suggests  a  contrast  v\ith  '  writ- 
eth.' — Say  not  in  thy  heart.  (LXX.,  defectively;  'saying;'  A. 
v.:  'that  thou  shouldst  say.)  This  phrase  is  =  ' think  not,'  but 
usually  suggests  an  evil  thought. — Who  shall  ascend  into  hea- 
ven ?  'For  us'  (LXX.)  is  omitted.  This  question  is  thus  explained 
by  the  Apostle  in  his  own  language,  which  he  substitutes  for  the 
clause  of  design  in  the  Old  Testament  passage.  Similar  clauses  are 
substituted  in  vers.  7,  8. — That  is,  to  bring  Christ  dcwn.  '  That 
is'  introduces  the  explanation,  but  the  whole  clause  may  mean  either 
(1.)  'Whoever  asks  this'  question,  says,  in  effect,  who  will  bring 
Christ  down  ?  thus  denying  that  He  has  come ;  or  (2.)  '  That  is,  in 
order  to  bring  Christ  down  ; '  substituting  this  purpose  for  that  ex- 
pressed in  Deuteronomy.  The  latter  sense  agrees  best  with  the  view 
that  Paul  is  interpreting  the  passage  in  Deuteronomy;  the* former 
with  the  other  theories  respecting  his  use  of  it.  We  interpret  this 
clause  as  referring  to  tlie  Incarnation,  the  coming  down  from  heaven 
of  the  preexistent  and  promised  Messiah  (comp.  ver.  9).  Others  refer 
it  to  the  pre.^ent  exalted  position  of  Christ. 

Ver.  7.  Who  shall  descend  into  the  abyss  ?  LXX.  '  Who 
shall  pass  through  into  bejond  the  sea?'  The  descent  of  Christ  to  the 
realm  of  the  dead  '  is  in  any  case  the  undoubted  presiq^pofiition,  which 
led  Paul  to  substitute  the  words  of  our  passage  for  those  of  tlie  origi- 
nal' (Meyer),  The  next  clause  compels  us  fo  take  this  view,,  but 
Various  explanations  have  been  given  of  the  variation  from  the  Old 
Testament  language.  '  The  probable  solution  of  the  difference  is,  that 
the  ideas  beyond  the  sea  and  beneath  the  earth  coincide  as  designations 
of  the  realm  of  the  dead'  (Lange). — That  is,  etc.  See  the  similar 
clause  in  ver.  6.  The  two  verses  imply  that  the  Incarnation  and  the 
Resurrection  are  accomplished  facts  ;  hence  that  such  questions  are 
forbidden  by  'the  righteousness  of  faith.'  But  what  kind  of  questions 
are  they?  simply  of  unbelief,  or  also  of  perplexity,  or  of  anxiety? 
Certainly  the  fundamental  error  is  one  of  unbelief,  and  that  in  regard 
to  the  main  facts  here  presented  (comp.  ver.  9).  But  it  is  not  neces- 
sary to  exclude  the  other  views,  which  are  suggested  by  the  original 
passage  :  '  The  anxious  follower  after  righteousness  is  not  disappointed 
by  an  impracticable  code,  nor  mocked  by  an  unintelligible  revelation ; 
the  word  is  near  him,  therefore  accessible ;  plain  and  simple,  and 
therefore  apprehensible — deals  with  definite  historical  fact,  and  there- 


172  •  ROMANS  X.  [10:  8,9. 

8  But  what  saith  it  ?     The  word  is  nigh  thee,  in  thy 
mouth,  and  in  thy  heart :  that  is,  the  word  of  faith, 

9  which  we  preach:  ^  because  if  thou  shalt  ^confess  with 

1  Or,  that. 
2  Some  ancient  authorities  read  confess  the  word  with  thy  mouth,  that  Jesus  is  Lord. 

fore  certain '  (Alford).  It  is  but  fair  to  present  another  view  of  the 
whole  passage,  as  summed  up  by  Godet :  '  All  the  doing  demanded 
from  man  by  the  law  (ver.  5)  and  which  he  can  accomplish  only  im- 
perfectly, has  been  already  perfectly  accomplished  by  Christ,  whether 
it  has  to  do  with  the  conquest  of  heaven  by  holiness,  or  the  doing 
away  of  condemnation  by  expiation.  There  only  remains  then  to  man, 
in  order  to  be  saved,  to  belieoe  in  that  work  by  applying  it  to  himself; 
and  this  is  that  which  the  righteousness  of  faith  commands  us  (ver.  8), 
after  having  forbidden  us  (vers.  6,  7)  to  pretend  ourselves  to  open  hea- 
ven and  close  hell.  .  .  .  Christ  having  charged  Himself  with  the  doing, 
and  having  left  to  us  only  the  believing,  the  work  of  Christ  puts  an  end 
to  the  legal  regime  ;  that  which  the  Apostle  would  prove  (ver.  4).'  So 
Beet :  '  Moses  asserts  the  great  principle  that  a  revelation  from  God 
makes  needless,  and  therefore  ought  to  put  an  end  to,  all  human  effort 
for  that  which  Fie  reveals.' 

Ver.  8.  But  -what  saith  it?  This  is  inserted  to  introduce  the 
positive  statement  of  Moses  ;  but  '  it'  here  refers  to  '  the  righteousness 
of  faith'  (ver.  6). — The  word  is  nigh  thee,  etc.  (comp.  the  LXX. 
as  given  above).— In  thy  mouth,  and  in  thy  heart.  These  terms 
explain  how  the  word  is  nigh.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  pious  Israelite 
had  the  law  in  his  mouth  and.  heart,  i.  e.,  to  confess  and  believe,  pre- 
cisely as  Paul  afterwards  explains  in  applying  the  language  to  the 
gospel.  Others  find  in  the  original  passage  only  a  reference  to  the 
familiar  accessible  character  of  the  law  (see  above).  But  after  all  any 
true  grasp  of  God's  revelation,  even  in  the  days  of  Moses,  was  gained 
in  the  way  Paul  describes. — The  word  of  faith  ;  either  respecting 
fiith,  or,  which  forms  the  substratum  and  object  of  faith  (Alford). — 
Which  -we  preach.  Paul  himself,  and  all  other  preachers  of  the 
gospel.  This  explanation  of  '  woi'd '  in  the  Old  Testament  passage  is 
in  accoi-danoe  with  the  statement  of  ver.  4.  Any  nearness  of  the  Old 
Testament  'word'  was  due  to  its  leading  to  Christ,  whom  (he  gospel 
proclaimed  as  the  obj  ect  of  faith  ;  hence  to  this  'word'  the  Old  Testa- 
ment passage  pointed.  Some  limit  the  reference  to  the  easy  and 
familiar  doctiine  of  faith. 

_  Ver.  9.  Because.  The  word  may  mean  'that'  (as  in  A.  V.),  in- 
dicating the  purport  of  the  word  preached,  but '  because'  is  preferable 
here.  We  have  then  a  proof  that  '  the  word  is  nigh.' — If  thou  shalt 
confess  with  thy  mouth.  This  is  placed  first,  to  correspond  with 
'  in  thy  mouth  '  (ver.  8)  ;  after  the  proof  is  completed  the  order  is 
changed  (ver.  10).  The  marginal  reading  is  accepted  by  Westcott  and 
Hort,  mainly  upon  the  authority  of  B. — Jesus  as  Lord.     There  is 


10:10,11.]  ROMANS  X.  173 

thy  mouth  Jesus  as  Lord,  and  shalt  beheve  in  thy 
heart  that  God  raised  him  from  the  dead,  thou  shalt 

10  be  saved :    for  Avith   the   heart   man   believeth    unto 
ritrhteousness ;  and  with  the  mouth  confession  is  made 

11  unto  salvation.     For  'the  scripture  saith,  Whosoever 

liitle  doubt  that  this  is  the  correct  explf-oation.  This  confession  im- 
plies i-hat  He  has  become  Incarnate  (comp.  ver.  6  :  '  who  shall  ascend 
into  heaven?');  for  'Lord'  is  the  term  applied  to  Jehovah  in  the 
LXX.  '  In  this  appellation  is  the  sum  of  faith  and  salvation'  ( Ben- 
gel  j. — Believe  in  thy  heart.  Comp.  'in  thy  heart':  ver.  8. 
'  Heart'  is  to  be  taken  in  the  wide  Biblical  sense,  and  not  limited  to 
the  affections. — That  God  raised  him,  etc.  This  answers  to  the 
question  of  ver.  7.  Paul  alwajs  gives  prominence  to  this  tact  of  Re- 
demption. His  example  should  be  followed  by  all  modern  preachers. 
— Thou  shalt  be  saved.  The  requisiies  for  salvation,  as  here 
stated,  are :  belief  with  the  heart  in  the  Resurrection  of  Jesus,  not  as 
an  isolated  historical  event,  but  as  involving  the  previous  Advent  of 
the  Son  of  God,  who  is  now  the  ascended  Lord — and  hence  confession 
of  Him  as  Lord. 

Ver.  10.  For  with  the  heart,  etc.  This  is  an  explanation  of 
ver.  9.  'The  idea  of  salvation  is  analyzed;  it  comprise.^  two  facts: 
being  justified  and  being  saved  (in  the  full  sense  of  the  word).  The 
first  fact  is  specially  connected  with  the  act  of  faith,  the  second  with 
that  of  confession'  (Godet).  Here  belief  comes  first,  in  accordance 
with  Christian  experience. — Man  believeth,  lit.,  '  it  is  believed,' 
unto  righteousness,  i.  e.,  with  this  result,  that  righteousness  is  ob- 
tained ;  men  are  accounted  righteous  when  they  believe  with  the  heart. 
— And  with  the  mouth  confession  is  made,  or,  '  man  confess- 
eth,'  lit.,  '  it  is  confessed.'  The  impersonal  form  has  the  force  of  a 
general  statement.  We  might  render  :  '  faith  is  exercised,'  to  conform 
with  'confession  is  made.'  —Unto  salvation,  with  this  result,  namely, 
'  salvation '  ;  here  including,  as  we  hold,  sanctification  and  glory.  It 
is  not  necessary  to  limit  this  to  the  latter.  The  two  parallel  clauses 
are  closely  coanected.  True  faith  always  leads  to  confession  ;  confes- 
sion is  nothing  without  true  faith.  Public  confession  is  a  confirmation 
of  our  own  faith  ;  a  bond  of  union  with  others  ;  an  outward  pledge 
to  consistent  living  ;  but  above  all  an  act  of  loyalty  to  Christ. 

Ver.  11.  For  the  scripture  saith.  Isa.  28:  16,  already  cited 
in  chap.  9:  33.  After  the  extended  proof  that  'Christ  is  the  end  of 
the  law  unto  righteousness  to  every  one  that  believeth,'  the  passage  is 
introduced  again  to  confirm  that  statement.  Strictly  speaking  '  for' 
furnishes  a  proof  of  the  former  half  of  ver.  10. — Whosoever,  etc. 
The  word  answering  to  '  whosoever,'  more  literally,  '  every  one,'  is  not 
found  in  the  original  passage  (comp.  chap.  9  :  33).  But  it  is  properly 
inserted  here,  because  this  idea  of  univer.'^ality,  which  is  implied  in 
the  original  prophecy,  has  not  only  been  established  in  the  iniei-vening 
dijcussion,  but  is  the  theme  of  the  succeeding  verses. 


174  ROMANS  X.  [10:  12,  13. 

12  believeth  on  him  shall  not  be  put  to  shame.  For 
there  is  no  distinction  between  Jew  and  Greek  :  for 
the  same  Lord  is  Lord  of  all^  and  is  rich  unto  all  that 

13  call  upon  him  :  for,  Whosoever  shall  call  upon  the 

Vers.  12-18.  These  verses  should  form  a  separate  paragraph.  In 
the  previous  verses  the  method  of  faith  is  shown  to  have  been  God's 
way  of  salvation  in  all  ages ;  here  it  is  dechired  to  be  His  way  for  all 
people.  It  is  gratuitous,  lience  universal.  This  way  is  open  to  all  (vers. 
12,  13)  and  is  to  be  preached  to  all  (vers.  14-18).  This  serves  to  em- 
phasize the  responsibility  of  the  Jews  for  their  own  exclusion. 

Ver.  12.  For  there  is  no  distinction  (comp.  chap.  3:  22)  be- 
tween Jew  and  Greek,  i.  e.,  Gentile  (comp.  chap.  1  :  18  and  else- 
where). Proof  of  the  universal  '^vhosoever'  (ver.  11). — For  the 
same  Lord  is  Lord  of  all.  Other  constructions  have  been  defended, 
but  the  main  thought  remains  unaltered.  It  seems  best  to  refer  this, 
not  to  the  Father,  but  to  Christ  (the  exclusive  subject  since  ver.  4), 
especially  as  He  is  termed  '  Lord  of  all'  (Acts  10:  36),  and  ver.  9  has 
emphasized  the  confession  of  Him  '  as  Lord.'  The  oneness  of  the 
Lord  is  a  proof  that  there  is  no  distinction. — And  is  rich ;  shows 
Himself  rich  in  giving. — Unto  all.  Toward  all  the  riches  of  His 
grace  may  be  directed  ;  this  proves  that  there  is  no  distinction  ;  but 
only  those  are  really  the  recipients  of  it,  that  call  upon  him,  thus 
proving  their  faith  by  their  invocation  of  Him,  which  is  a  confession 
of  Him.  '  The  true  confession  of  fiith  is  in  effect  that  cry  of  adora- 
tion :  Jesus  Lord  !  And  that  cry  can  be  uttered  equally  by  every  hu- 
man heart,  Jew  or  Gentile,  without  its  having  need  of  any  law.  Be- 
hold how  the  universalism  founded  on  faith  excludes  henceforth  the 
dominion  of  law'  (Godet). 

Ver.  13.  For  w^hosoever.  The  citation  is  from  Joel  2 :  32 ; 
comp.  Acts  2  :  21,  where  the  LXX.  is  even  more  closely  followed. 
'For'  is  inserted,  since  the  citation  is  introduced  here  as  a  proof  of 
ver.  12.—  Shall  call  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord,  etc.  The  pro- 
phecy refers  to  '  Jehovah,'  but  in  His  final  revelation  of  Himself 
(comp.  Acts  2:  17:  'in  the  last  days').  If  Christ  is  meant  in  ver. 
12,  then  this  prophecy  is  applied  'justly  to  Christ,  who  has  appeared 
in  the  name  of  God,  and  continually  rules  as  His  Representative  and 
Revealer,  and  Mediator,  whose  name  was  now  the  very  specific  object 
of  the  Christian  calling  on  the  Lord'  (Meyer).  When,  however,  this 
author  speaks  of  this  '  calling  '  as  not  being  '  the  worshipping  abso- 
lutely,' but  rather  '  worship  according  to  that  relativity  in  the  con- 
sciousness of  the  worshipper,  which  is  conditioned  by  the  relation  of 
Christ  to  the  Father,'  he  is  unsupported  by  the  records  of  Christian 
experience.  The  heart  of  the  believer,  calling  upon  Jesus  as  Lord, 
makes  a  loyal  surrender  to  Him  and  in  its  joyous  devotion  to  the 
Master,  is  not  apt  to  make  this  distinction  between  absolute  and  rela- 
tive worship, — a  distinction  which  is  not  in  accordance  with  Biblical 
monotheism,  and  is  verbal  rather  than  real. 


10:14,15.]  ROMANS  X.  175 

14  name  of  the  Lord  shall  be  saved.  How  then  shall 
thev  call  on  him  in  whom  they  have  not  believed  ? 
and  how  shall  they  believe  in  him  whom  they  have 
not    heard  ?    and    how    shall    they    hear   without   a 

15  preacher  ?  and  how  shall  they  preach,  except  they  be 
sent?  even  as  it  is  written,  How  beautiful  are  the 
feet  of  them  that  bring  ^  glad  tidings  of  good  things ! 

1  Or,  a  gospel. 

Ver.  14.  How  then  shall  they  call,  etc.  In  the  case  of  the 
four  verbs :  'shall  call,'  'shall  believe,'  'shall  hear,'  'shaJl  preach,' 
the  subjunctive  (deliberative)  form  is  better  supported.  '  They ' 
throughout  is  indefinite.  '  Can  '  might  be  substituted  fur  '  shall,'  but 
is  perhaps  too  strong.  The  Apostle  argues  from  the  cited  prophecy 
(ver.  13)  the  necessity  of  preachers  sent  forth  iii  accordance  with  an- 
other prophecy  (ver.  15),  in  order  by  thus  enforcing  the  universality 
of  the  gospel  to  show  more  plainly  the  responsibility  of  the  Jews. — ■ 
On  him,  etc.  Here  and  throughout  the  reference  is  to  Christ. — Have 
not  believed  ;  lit.,  '  did  not  believe,'  indicating  the  beginning  of 
faith  ;  but  English  usage  favors  '  have  believed,'  and  so  in  the  next 
clause. — Whom  they  have  not  heard.  The  reference  is  to  hear- 
ing Christ  through  His  preachers,  or,  to  hearing  the  Christ  who  is 
preached  ;  since  '  whom '  here  cannot  be  grammatically  explained  as 
=  about  whom. — Without  a  preacher  ;  apart  from,  independently 
of,  one  preaching,  i.  e.,  proclaiming  a  message  as  a  herald. 

Ver.  15.  Except  they  be  sent.  Sent  by  Christ  is  implied,  but 
the  main  thought  is  sent,  'through  the  word  of  God '  (ver.  17).  Com- 
missioned through  the  message  they  proclaim,  as  this  citation  from 
Isaiah  indicates. — As  it  is -written  (Isa.  52:  7). — How  beautiful, 
etc.  The  four  oldest  manuscripts,  together  with  minor  authorities, 
sustain  the  briefer  reading :  '  How  beautiful  are  the  feet  of  them  that 
bring  glal  tidings  of  good  things  I '  The  fuller  form  is  that  of  the 
LXX.,  hence  it  is  likely  to  have  arisen  from  a  desire  to  conform.  The 
Apostle  has  also  omitted  '  upon  the  mountains,'  and  substituted  the 
plural  for  the  singular.  (The  A.  Y.  obscures  the  parallelism  of  the 
original;  'preach  the  gospel'  and  'bring  glad  tidings,'  represent  the 
same  word.)  The  prophecy  is  undoubtedly  Messianic,  and,  hence, 
properly  applied  by  the  Apostle  to  the  preachers  of  the  gospel.  TlTe 
primary  reference  to  the  restoration  from  exile  '  derived  all  its  value 
from  being  introductory  to  that  most  glorious  deliverance  to  be  ef- 
fected by  the  Redeemer'  (Hodge).  The  necessity  and  dignity  of  the 
preachers  of  the  gospel,  as  here  set  forth,  form  a  solemn  warning  to 
all  who  attempt  to  preach  without  being  sent,  as  well  as  an  encourage- 
ment to  all,  however  feeble,  who  have  been  sent.  The  character  of 
the  message  is  the  main  test  of  the  preacher's  mission. 


176  ROMANS  X.  [10:  16-18. 

16  But  they  did  not  all  hearken  to  the  ^glad  tidings. 
For  Isaiah  saith,  Lord,  who  hath  believed  our  report? 

17  So  belief  cometh  of  hearing,  and  hearing  by  the  word 

18  of  Christ.     But  I   say,  Did   they  not   hear?     Yea, 
verily, 

1  Or,  gospel. 

Ver.  16.  But,  on  the  contrary,  contrasting  the  preaching  to  all 
with  the  limited  result,  they,  indefinitely  used,  though  the  applica- 
tion to  the  Jews  is  implied,  did  not  hearken  to  the  glad  tidings. 
All  who  heard  did  not  '  hearken.'  There  is  a  verbal  correspondence 
in  the  Greek  also.  Faith  was  required  ;  those  who  did  not  believe 
were  those  who  did  not  hearken. — ^For  introduces  the  proof  that 
•not  all'  hearkened. — Isaiah  saith  (chap.  3:  1).  Paul  believed 
that  Isaiah  was  the  author  of  the  entire  book.  This  state  of  things 
was  foreseen  and  predicted  ;  was  not  accidental,  but  was  recognized 
in  the  Divine  plan. — "Who  hath  believed  our  report  ?  The 
word  'report'  is  the  same  as  'hearing'  in  ver.  17;  the  variation  in 
rendering  obscures  the  argument.  But  it  is  difficult  to  find  a  word 
which  will  express  the  exact  sense,  namely,  'that  which  is  heard,' 
almost  equivalent  to  that  which  is  preached.  In  older  English  the 
phrases  'a  good  hearing,'  'a  bad  hearing,'  occur  in  the  sense  of  good 
and  bad  news.  It  confuses  the  sense  to  understand  it  as  what  is 
heard  of  God  (i^  the  word  of  God),  and  the  act  of  hearing  is  not 
meant ;  comp.  Gal.  3  :  2.  The  citation  is  quite  exact  from  the  LXX., 
'Lord'  being  inserted.  The  Messianic  reference  of  the  passage  is  an 
ample  warrant  for  the  application  here  made  by  the  Apostle,  to  unbe- 
lief in  the  Christian  preaching.  The  preaching  of  the  gospel  is  a 
duty,  whether  men  hearken  or  not ;  to  believe  the  message  is  the  ne- 
cessary condition  of  really  hearkening. 

Ver.  17.  So  belief  cometh  of  hearing,  i.  e.,  from  the  announce- 
ment which"  is  heard.  'The  heard  preaching  of  the  gospel  brini,s 
about  in  men's  minds  faith  in  Christ'  (Meyer). — And  hearing  by 
the  word  of  Christ.  The  weight  of  authority  favors  the  substitu- 
tion of  '  Christ '  for  '  God.'  '  Word '  is  literally  '  saying,'  and  probably 
means  command  or  order,  taking  up  again  the  idea  of  the  verb,  '  ex- 
cept they  be  sent'  (ver.  15).  Thus  the  authority  of  the  message  is 
emphasized  over  against  the  unbelief  of  some,  preparing  the  way  for 
the  application  to  the  responsibility  of  the  .Jews. 

Ver.  18.  But  I  say.  The  strongly  adversative  'but'  introduces 
the  answer  to  a  possible  objection,  in  excuse  of  the  unbelief  spoken  of 
in  ver.  16. — Did  they  not  hear?  'They,'  i.  e.,  those  who  did  not 
hearken;  the  Jews  are  meant,  but  not  yet  directly  spoken  of.  The 
question  in  the  Greek  points  to  a  negative  answer:  It  cannot  be  that 
they  did  not  hear  =they  did  hear,  though  they  did  not  hearken,  hence 
have  not  this  excuse. — Yea,  verily.  Comp.  chap.  9:  20,  where  the 
same  word  is  rendered  'nay  but,'      Here  the  thought  is:  Sd  far  from 


10:  19.]  ROMANS  X.  177 

Their  sound  went  out  into  all  the  earth, 
And  their  words  unto  the  ends  of  Hhe  world. 
19  But  I  say,  Did  Israel  not  know  ?     First  Moses  saith, 

1  Gr.  the  inhabited  earth. 

its  being  the  case  that  they  did  not  hear,  the  very  opposite  is  true. — 
Their  sound,  etc.  The  rest  of  the  verse  is  taken  from  Ps.  19:  4  (A. 
Y.),  in  the  exact  words  of  the  LXX.  But  it  is  not  cited  as  in  itself  a 
proof  from  Scripture  ;  for  there  is  no  formuhi  of  quotation,  and  the 
Psalmist  is  speaking  of  the  universal  revelation  of  God  in  nature,  not 
in  the  gospel.  The  Apostle  applies  the  language  to  the  universal 
preaching  of  the  gospel,  which  he  affirms.  There  is,  however,  a  pro- 
priety in  this  application.  '  The  manifestation  of  God  in  nature,  is  for 
all  His  creatures  to  whom  it  is  made,  a  pledge  of  their  participation  in 
the  clearer  and  higher  revelation'  (Hengstenberg)  That  the  gospel 
had  actually  been  preached  everywhere  is  not  what  the  Apostle  affirms. 
It  had  become  universal  in  its  scope,  and  occupied  the  central  positions 
of  the  Roman  world.  Its  wide  extension  among  the  Gentiles  showed 
that  the  Jews  could  find  no  excuse  for  their  unbelief  in  not  having 
heard.  Everywhere  there  had  been  opportunity  for  them  to  hear.  The 
verse  applies  even  more  strikingly  to  those  in  gospel  Ian  1^. — '  Sound  ' 
is  the  LXX.  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  'line,'  which  in  the  Psalm  means 
'a  musical  chord.' — The  world,  lit.,  'the  inhabited  earth.'  The  R. 
V.  adds  this  margin  where  this  word  occurs,  to  distinguish  it  from 
similar  terms. 

A'er.  19.  But  I  say;  as  in  ver.  18,  introducing  a  similar  question, 
and  another  supposed  excuse  — Did  Israel  not  know  ?  This  is  the 
direct  application  to  the  Jews,  who  have  been  in  rcind  throughout.  The 
anticipated  answer  (as  the  original  indicates)  is  a  denial  of  the  not- 
knowing,  t.  e.,  an  affirmation  that  Israel  knew.  But  'knew'  ichat? 
The  connection  with  ver.  18  favors  the  explanation  :  '  knew  that  the 
gospel  would  go  forth  into  all  the  earth.'  The  prophecies  which  fol- 
low, it  is  true,  prove  that  the  gospel  was  to  pass  over  from  the  .Jews  to 
the  Gentiles.  But  the  more  general  view  seems  preferable.  Meyer  : 
'  This  universal  destination  of  the  preaching  of  Christ  expressed  in 
ver.  18  must  have  been  known  by  the  .lews,  for  long  ago  Moses  and 
also  Isaiah  had  prophesied  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles. — Isaiah  like- 
wise, the  refractory  spirit  o^'  opposition  thereto  of  the  Jews  (vers.  20, 
21).'  If  they  had  not  known  this,  there  might  have  been  some  excuse 
for  them,  as  surprised  by  the  event.  But  there  was  not  even  this  pal- 
liation. Many  commentators  supply  'the  gospel.'  But  the  sad  fact 
which  Paul  discusses,  is  the  rejection  of  the  gospel  by  Israel.  Hence 
the  form  of  the  question  (see  above)  is  fatal  to  this  view. — First 
Moses  saith.  From  this  point  to  the  close  of  the  chapter  we  have 
the  direct  Scriptural  proof,  that  the  Jews  ought  not  to  have  been  in 
ignorance.  The  universality  had  been  announced  to  Abraham,  but 
Moses  was  the  '  first '  to  write  of  this  ;  others,  among  them  Isaiah,  re- 
12 


]78  ROMANS  X.  [10:20,21. 

I  will  provoke  you  to  jealousy  with  that  which 

is  no  nation. 
With    a    nation    void   of  understanding   will  I 

anger  you. 

20  And  Isaiah  is  very  bold,  and  saith, 

I  was  found  of  them  that  sought  me  not; 
I  became    manifest    unto   them  that   asked  not 
of  me. 

21  Bat  as  to  Israel  he  saith,  All  the  day  long  did  I 
spread  out  my  hands  unto  a  disobedient  and  gainsay- 
ing people. 

peated  the  prophecy. — I  will  provoke  you,  etc.  The  citation  is 
quite  exact,  from  the  LXX.  of  Deut.  32:  21.  'You'  is  substituted  for 
'them.' — "With  that  which  is  no  nation.  The  preposifion  is  al- 
most='  on  account  of,'  but  implying  more  than  that:  'aroused  on  ac- 
count of  and  directed  against  a  "no-nation."'  'No-people'  (comp. 
chap.  9  :  25)  is  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew. — With  a  nation  void 
of  understanding  (idolatrous)  w^ill  I  anger  you,  or,  'excite  you 
to  anger.'  The  use  made  by  the  Apostle  of  this  prophecy  is  very  apt. 
'  Moses  prophetically  assumes  the  departure  of  Israel  from  God,  and 
His  rejection  of  them,  and  denounces  from  God  that,  as  they  had 
moved  Him  to  jealousy  with  their  "no-gods"  (idols)  and  provoked 
Him  to  anger  by  their  vanities, — so  He  would,  by  receiving  into  His 
favor  a  "no-nation"  make  them  jealous,  and  provoke  them  to  anger 
by  adopting  instead  of  them  a  foolish  nation  '  (Alford).  The  applica- 
tion of  the  original  prophecy  need  not  be  confined  to  the  Canaanites. 

Yer.  20.  And  (introducing  another  prophet)  Isaiah  is  very 
bold,  and  saith.  'But  Isaiah  even  ventures  to  say'  (Lange),  or, 
he  is  embolrjened,  and  hence  he  says. — I  was  found  of  them,  etc. 
Isa.  15:  1  is  here  cited,  with  transposed  clauses;  otherwise  quite 
closely  after  the  LXX.  which  changes:  '  I  was  sought'  (Hebrew)  into 
'I  was  fount,'  but  quite  in  accordance  with  the  original  prophecy. 
That  Paul  understood  the  original  prophecy  as  referring  to  the  Gen- 
tiles must  be  maintained  by  all  who  admit  his  logical  acuteness,  and 
of  course  by  those  who  accept  his  authority  as  an  inspired  Apostle. 
But  many  apply  the  words  of  Isaiah  to  the  Jews,  a  view  which  is  op- 
posed by  the  rest  of  the  verse  (Isa.  65  :  1  ;  'I  said,  behold  me,  behold 
me,  unto  a  nation  that  was  not  called  by  my  name'),  since  the  privi- 
lege of  being  called  by  the  name  of  Jehovah  was  ever  cherished  by 
the  ancient  Jews  and  t'he  word  '  nation '  is  that  used  of  Gentiles. 

Ver.  21.  But  as  to  Israel ;  not,  'to,'  nor  yet,  '  against.'  The  con- 
trast is  between  '  Israel '  and  the  Gentiles  referred  to  in  the  prophecy 
(ver.  20). — He,  i.  e.,  Isaiah,  speaking  for  God,  as  in  the  previous 
verse  saith  (Isa.  55 :  2). — All  the   day  long  did  I  spread  out. 


11:  1.]  ROMANS  XI.  179 

Chapter  11:   1-10. 

The  Rejection  of  Israel  is  not  Total. 

1      I  say  then,  Did  God  cast  off  his  people.     God  for- 
bid.    For  I  also  am  an  Israelite,  of  the  seed  of  Abra- 

etc.  The  order  of  the  LXX.  is  slightly  changed  in  the  citation. 
'  Spread  out,'  as  one  who  invites  to  his  embrace,  or,  even  supplicates  ; 
this  God  is  represented  as  doing  without  intermission,  '  the  whole 
day/ — A  disobedient  and  gainsaying  people.  So  the  LXX., 
but  the  Hebrew  is  simply  '  a  rebellious  pejple."  Probably  'disobe- 
dient '  presents  the  positive,  and  '  gainsaying '  the  negative  side  of 
the  rebellious  conduct ;  or,  rebellion  is  distinguished  into  refusing 
God's  commands  and  contradicting  His  words,  disobedience  and  unbe- 
lief acting  and  reacting  upon  each  other  continually.  Habitual  and 
continuous  conduct  is  indicated  by  the  foi-m  of  the  (jreek.  Ihus  the 
discussion  of  the  responsibility  of  the  Jews  ends:  God  ofiered  them 
the  gospel,  but  they  would  not  accept.  The  universality  of  the  gos- 
pel implied  the  one  way  of  faith  ;  want  of  faith  was  the  rejection  of 
the  universal  gospel. 

Chapter  11. 

3.  The  Prospective    Solution  :     (i.)    The  Rejection    of  Israel  is 
NOT  Total;  vers.  1-10.     (ii.)  It  is  not  Final;  vers.  11-36. 

I.   The  Rejection  of  Israel  is  not  Total,  vers.  1-10. 

This  section  opens  with  the  question  ('Did  God  cast  off  His  people?'),  which  the 
whole  chapter  answers  in  the  negative,  and  which  Paul  discusses  with  a  feeling  both 
patriotic  and  religious  (ver.  1).  The  historical  fact  in  the  days  of  Elijah  (vers.  2-4) 
shows  that,  now  as  then,  when  all  seem  to  have  rejected  Jehovah.  He  has  still  a  rem- 
nant aco  -rding  to  the  election  of  grace  (ver.  5),  not  of  works  (ver.  6).  At  the  same 
time  the  many  were  rejected  (ver.  7),  in  accordance  with  the  predictions  of  Isaiah 
(ver.  8)  and  David  (vers.  9,  10). 

Ver.  1,  I  say  then.  'Then '  introduces  the  question  as  a  plausi- 
ble, but  incorrect,  inference  from  the  entire  previous  discussion ; 
especially,  however,  from  the  Scriptural  proof  of  vers.  19-21. — Did 
God  oast  off  his  people?  'Cast  off'  is  preferable  to  'cast  away;' 
comp.  Ps.  94  :  14.  '  The  Divine  act  of  casting  off  from  Himself  is  not 
viewed  as  the  cause  (against  this  is  chap.  10:  21).  but  as  the  penal  con- 
sequence, of  the  disdaining  God's  loving  will'  (Meyer).  '  His  people' 
refers  to  the  .Jewish  nation,  and  the  phrase  itself  '  contains  the  reason 
for  the  denial'  (Bengel).  Some,  however,  find  here,  as  in  ver.  2,  an 
exclusive  reference  to  the  elect  among  the  .Jews.  So  Hodge:  'The 
rejection  of  the  .Jews  as  a  nation  was  consistent  with  all  that  God  had 
promised  to  their  fathers.  Those  promises  did  not  secure  the  salva- 
tion of  all  Jews,  or  of  the  Jews  as  a  nation.'     This  view  is  objection- 


180  ROMANS  XI.  [11:  2. 

2  ham,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjamin.  God  did  not  cast  off 
his  people  which  he  foreknew.  Or  wot  ye  not  what 
the  scripture  saith  ^  of  Elijah  ?  how  he  pleadeth  with 

1  Or,  in. 

able  on  many  accounts :  it  removes  the  discussion  from  the  historical 
point  of  view  to  a  strictly  theological  one;  it  proposes  a  less  natural 
inference;  it  uses  'people'  in  a  ditierent  sense  from  that  of  the. pre- 
ceding verse,  and  is  less  suited  to  the  entire  discussion  than  th^other 
view.  See  further  on  ver.  2.— For  I  also,  etc.  The  indignant  de- 
nial is  followed  by  this  proof  from  the  Apostle's  descent.  But  Avhat  is 
the  nature  of  this  proof/  Three  views  are  held:  (1.)  He  is  one  among 
many  examples  ('also')  that  God  had  riot  entirely  rejected  His  people. 
This  is  the  common  one.  (2.)  His  patriotic  feeling 'leads  him  to  deny 
this  indignantly  :  the  proof  of  his  denial  follows  in  ver.  2,  etc.  This 
is  favored  by  the  detailed  reference  to  his  descent.  (3.)  The  restora- 
tion of  Israel  as  a  nation  is  so  pi^ominent,  that  '  if  such  a  hypothesis 
were  to  be  conceded,  it  would  exclude  from  God's  kingdom  the  u-riter 
himself  as  an  Israelite'  (Alford).  But  this,  liowever  well  suited  to 
the  thought  of  the  next  section,  does  not  suit  the  immediate  context. 
As  between  (1.)  and  (2.),  the  latter  is  tenable,  if  the  theocratic  idea  is 
included ;  but  the  former  is  on  the  whole  preferable.  Weizsacker 
■well  suggests  that  such  an  argument  proves  that  the  RoiDan  congre- 
gation included  no  large  Jewish  element. —  Of  the  seed  of  Abra- 
ham ;  to  w^hom  the  covenant  promise  Avas  first  made. — Of  the  tribe 
of  Benjamin;  comp.  Phil.  3:5;  this  tribe  with  Judah  made  up  the 
nation  of  Israel  after  the  captivity.  This  does  not  exclude  the  patriotic 
feeling,  which  has  appear  d  throughout  the  whole  discussion. 

Ver"!  2.  His  people  which  he  foreknew.  Here,  too,  the  refer- 
ence is  to  the  nation,  and  not  to  the  spiritual  remnant,  the  elect.  If 
the  latter  part  of  the  chapter  were  v-  anting,  this  might  be  the  sense. 
The  phrase  'which  He  foreknew'  need  not  be  taken  in  its  individual 
reference,  as  in  chap.  8:  36,  where  a  plural  pronoun  is  joined  with 
the  verb.  To  limit  it  to  those  elected  is  not  only  contrary  to  the  sweep 
of  the  argument,  but  to  the  historical  position  of  the  theocratic  nsition  : 
a  foreknoAvledge  resulting  in  such  theocratic  privilege  is  as  consistent 
with  the  tenor  of  Scripture  as  the  more  individual  reference. — Or 
wot  (know)  ye  not.  '  Or'  introduces  a  new  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion (comp.  chaps,  fi  :  3  ;  9  :  21),  namely,  the  historical  case  from  the 
Scripture.— Of  Elijah;  lit., 'in  Elijah.'  In  the  .^tory  concerning 
Elijah  ;  comp.  Mark  12:  26:  'm  the  pin ce  concerninfj  the  Bush.'  This 
method  of  reference  is  common  in  Philo  and  in  Rabbinical  authors ; 
some  instances  occur  in  the  classics.  The  occasion  was  after  the 
fist  of  the  prophet  at  Horeb  (1  Kings  19).— How  he  pleadeth 
with  God  against  Israel.  This  is  the  object  of  'do  ye  not 
know.'  '  Pleadeth  against '  is  equivalent  to  complaining  of.  '  Saying* 
is  an  unnecessary  addition,  supported  by  few  authorities. 


1:  3,  4].  KOMANS  XI.  181 

3  God  against  Israel,  Lord,  they  have  killed  thy  prophets, 
they  have  digged  down  thine  altars  :  and  I  am  left 

4  alone,  and  they  seek  my  life.  But  what  saith  the  an- 
swer of  God  unto  him  ?  I  have  left  for  myself  seven 
thousand  men,  who  have  not  bowed  the  knee  to  Baal. 

Yer.  3.  Lord,  they  have  killed,  etc.  This  verse  is  freely  cited 
frora^he  LXX.;  1  Kings  19:  10  (ver.  14  is  a  repetition  of  ver,  10). 
The  two  clauses  are  transposed.  —  They  have  digged  down. 
'  And '  is  poorly  supported.  —  Thine  altars.  The  plural  points 
to  the  altars  as  the  high  places  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel  where 
Elijah  lived.  y\lthough  it  was  originally  forbidden  to  erect  such 
altars,  they  became  the  only  places  in  Israel  where  Jehovah  was 
publicly  worshipped.  Hence^  in  the  time  of  Elijah,  neglect  of  these 
was  really  neglect  of  wor.-hip. — I  am  left  alone,  or,  '  the  only  one.' 
The  latter  rendering  corresponds' better  with  the  LXX.,  but  is  some- 
what stronger  than  Paul's  citation.  The  language  of  Elijah  meant 
that  he  was  the  only  prophet  left;  while  the  transposition  of  the 
clauses  suggests  here  the  further  notion  :  I  am  the  only  true  woi^ship- 
per  of  Jehovah.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  the  Apostle  has 
departed  from  the  original  sense. — They  seek  my  life.  See  1 
Kings  19 :   1.2. 

A^er.  4.  But  what  saith  the  answer  of  God.  The  word  ren- 
dered '  answer  of  God  '  occurs  only  here  in  the  New  Testamert.  But 
in  a  number  of  cases  the  cognate  verb  occurs,  and  is  usually  rendered 
'  warned  of  Go  1.'  The  meaning  here  is  obvious;  but  the  noun  first 
had  the  sense  of  '  business,'  the  formal  audience  given  to  an  ambassa- 
dor, then  a  response  from  an  oracle  ;  this  was  not  the  classical  sense, 
but  occurs  in  2  Mace.  2:4;  9  :  17.— I  have  left,  or,  'left  remain- 
ing.' etc.  The  citation  is  from  1  Kings  19:  18.  and  varies,  though 
not  materially,  from  both  the  Hebrew  and  the  LXX.  The  mistake  of 
the  latter  in  reading  the  verb  is  correctel  by  the  Apostle.  '  Reserved' 
(A.  V.)  is  inexact.  For  myself;  this  addition  of  the  Apostle  fairly 
presents  the  sense  of  the  originnl :  'as  my  possession  and  for  my 
service,  over  against  the  i.lolitrous  abomination'  (Meyer).— Seven 
thousand  men.  Probably  a  definite  expression  for  an  indefinite 
number;  'seven'  need  not  be  regarded  as  significant. — Who;  of 
such  a  kind  as,  emphasising  the  faithful  character  of  the  men ;  the 
Hebrew  shows  that  these  were  all  that  remained  faithful.— Have 
not  bowed  the  knee  ;  on  any  occasion. — To  Baal.  The  feminine 
article  is  used  by  Paul,  while  the  LXX.  has  the  masculine  article. 
Explanation:  (1)  An  ellipsis,  hence  the  rendering  'to  the  image  of 
Baal.'  The  fact  that  the  LXX.  sometimes  uses  the  feminine  article 
with  the  name  of  the  false  deity,  renders  this  improbable,  and  this 
sense  would  require  a  second  article  with  Baal.  (2.)  This  heathen 
deity  was  conceived  of  as  of  both  sexes  (androgynous).  This  is  quite 
probable,  but  not  historically  proven.     It  should  be  observed,  how- 


182  ROMANS  XL  [11:  5-7. 

5  Even  so  then  at  this  present  tune  also  there  is  a  rem- 

6  nant  according  to  the  election  of  grace.     Bat  if  it  is 
by  grace,  it  is  no  more  of  works :  otherwise  grace  is 

7  no  more  grace.      What  then  ?      That  Avhich   Israel 

ever,  that  Astarte  (Ashtaroth),  the  Phoenician  goddess,  is  distin- 
guished from  the  feminine  Baal.  (3.)  Some  regard  the  feminine  as 
an  expression  of  contempt ;  but  this  is  the  least  probable  explanation. 
'Baal'  (signifying  lord,  ruler)  was  the  sun-god,  representing  the 
active  generative  principle  in  nature.  The  greatest  idolatrous  apos- 
tasy among  the  Israelites  was  to  the  worship  of  this  Phoenician  deity, 
and  the  name  occurs  in  the  Old  Testament  history  from  the  time  of 
Moses  to  that  of  Jeremiah. 

Ver.  5.  Even  so  then,  or,  '  thus  therefore  ; '  in  accordance  with 
this  historical  f;\ct  which  indicates  ('  therefore')  a  permanent  princi- 
ple, in  this  present  time  also,  as  well  as  in  the  similar  ancient 
times,  there  is  (more  exactly,  'has  become,'  and  still  exists)  a  rem- 
nant, a  small  number  out  of  the  mass;  and  this  'remnant'  has  be- 
come and  remains  such,  according  to  the  election  of  grace. 
The  phrase  is  to  be  joined,  not  with  the  noun,  but  witn  the  verb  (as 
above  indicated).  Here  the  reference  is  not  national,  but  individual, 
as  in  chap.  9.  This  view  is  further  sustained  by  ver.  6,  and  by  the 
obvious  opposition  to  Jewish  pride  of  works :  the  election  has  its 
source  in  God's  grace,  not  in  man's  merit. 

Ver,  6.  But  if  it  is  by  grace.  '  If  takes  up  the  assertion  of 
ver.  5,  as  if  to  say  :  '  since  the  remnant  exists  by  grace,  let  us  under- 
stand what  this  involves,  negatively,'  namely  :  it  is  no  more  of 
■works.  Here  the  individual  reference  is  clear.  '  No  more  '  ii  logi- 
cal, not  temporal ;  '  works'  are  entirely  excluded  in  this  matter  of  tlie 
remnant  existing  accoi'ding  to  the  election  of  grace. — Otherwise  ; 
'  since  in  that  case,'  if  it  were  of  works,  grace  is  (or,  more  exactly, 
'becometh')  no  more  grace.  'Becometh,'  sugge>ts  that  in  such  a 
case  grace  would  fail  to  show  itself  as  what  it  is  ;  '  positively  ex- 
pressed :  it  becomes  what  according  to  is  essence  it  is  not ;  it  gives  up 
its  specific  character'  (Meyer).  The  emphasis  placed  at  this  point  on 
the  doctrine  of  free  grace  is  doubtl- ss  to  prepire  for  what  follows: 
the  reference  to  the  many  rejected  (vers.  7-10)  as  well  as  the  state- 
ment of  the  final  solution  (vers.  li-32).  are  based  on  the  sovereignty 
of  God  in  His  dealings. — The  latter  half  of  the  verse  is  found  in  but 
one  of  the  more  ancient  manuscripts  (B),  though  it  is  added  by  a  late 
corrector  in  Aleph.  Critical  judgment  has  recently  become  more  de- 
cidedly against  the  genuineness  of  the  passage.  In  addition  to  the 
authorities  which  omit  it,  the  variations  of  those  containing  it  oppose 
its  retention.  If  retained  it  must  be  regarded  as  an  antithetical  repe- 
tition of  the  same  thought,  since  the  attempts  to  discover  an  addi- 
tional argument  have  been  futile  (comp.  the  far-fetched  vieAvs  of 
Lange,  Wordsworth  and  others). 

Yer.  7.     What  then  ?     The  inference  from  vers.  5,  6,  is  intro- 


11:8.]  ROMANS  XL  183 

seeketh   for,  that  he  obtained  not;    but  the  election 

8  obtained  it,  and  the  rest  were  hardened  :  according  as 

it  is  written,  God  gave  them  a  spirit  of  stupor,  eyes 

that  they  should  not  see,  and  ears  that  they  should  not 

duced  by  this  question. — That  •which  Israel  (as  a  mass)  seeketh 
(or,  'is  seeking')  for,  now  as  formerly;  chaps.  9  :  31 ;  10  :  3  show 
that  'righteousness'  is  the  object  sought.  Zealous  searching  is  not 
necessai'ily  indicated  here. — He  obtained  not ;  did  not  attain  unto  ; 
the  idea  of  not  finding  is  not  suggested.  The  connection  with  vr^rs.  5 
and  6  shows  that  this  took  place,  because  the  mass  of  the  nation  sought 
the  end  'as  of  works'  (chap.  9  :  82),  a  method  opposed  to  'grace.'  — 
But  the  election  ('the  remnant,'  abstractly  and  vivaciously  termed 
'the  election,' rather  than  'the  elect')  obtained  it,  and  the  rest 
•were  hardened.  'Blinded'  is  incorrect.  The  word  denotes  in  its 
primary  meaning:  'to  deprive  an  organ  of  its  natural  sensibility;  in 
the  moral :  to  take  from  the  heart  ihe  faculty  of  being  touched  by 
what  is  good  or  divine,,  from  the  intelligence  the  faculty  of  discerning 
between  the  true  and  the  false,  the  good  and  the  evil.  The  context 
will  explain  how  it  is  possible  that  a  similar  effect  can  be  attributed  to 
Divine  agency'  (Godet).  Comp.  on  chap,  9:18.  God's  agency  is 
undoubtedly  indicated  here  (comp.  vers.  8-10),  but  nowhere  is  thi.s 
spoken  of  in  a  way  that  implies  a  lessening  of  human  responsibility. 
The  pai-enthesis  of  the  A.  V.  is  unnecessary.  It  is  designed  to  connect 
this  clause  with  the  last  one  of  ver.  8. 

Ver.  8.  According  as  it  is  -written.  The  Scripture  passages 
are  cited  here,  because  they  set  forth  the  principle  of  Oivine  action, 
undeilying  the  statement  of  \^.r.  7  :  '  the  rest  were  iiardened,'  what 
had  occurred  in  Old  Testament  times  was  not  only  analogous,  but 
pointed  to  this  punishment  of  the  Jews,  the  agreement  being  '  that  of 
prophecy  and  fulfilment  according  to  rheT'ivine  teleology '(Meyei-). — 
He  gave  them  a  spirit  of  stupor.  The  citation  is  made  freely 
from  Is.  29:  10  (LXX.).  'Stupor'  (a  word  found  only  here)  meant 
first  ttie  numbness  produced  by  stupefj-mg  wine,  the  corresponding 
verb  being  applied  to  the  paralyzing  from  astonishment  or  grief. — 
Eyes  that  they  should  not  see,  etc.  This  part  of  the  verse  is 
from  Deut.  29  :  4,  freely  cited,  and  joined  by  the  Apostle  to  the  pre- 
ceding as  an  explanation ;  the  connection  in  the  original  passage 
being  also  with  '  He  gave.'  Others  find  here  a  further  combination 
withls.  6  :  9,  but  this  is  less  likely.  The  clauses  '  that  they  should 
not  see,'  *  that  they  should  not  hear,'  express  the  purpose  of  the  giving. 
— Unto  this  very  day  is  a  strengthening  of  the  words  of  Deut. 
29  :  24,  and  should  be  joined  with  what  immediately  precedes.  The 
fact  that  Isaiah  repeats  substantially  what  Moses  previously  said, 
iustifies  the  application  of  this  principle  to  the  attitude  of  the  mass  of 
the  Jews  in  the  Apostle's  day.  Clearly  then^God  punishes  men  by- 
giving  theoa  over  to  spiritual  insensibility. 


184  ROMANS  XI.  [11  :  9,  10. 

9  hear,  unto  this  very  clay.     And  David  saith, 
Let  their  table  be  made  a  snare,  and  a  trap. 
And   a    stumblingblock,   and   a   recompense   unto 
them : 
10  Let  their  eyes  be  darkened,  that  they  may  not  see, 
And  bow  thou  down  their  back  alway. 

Ver.  9.  And  David  saith.  The  citation  is  from  Ps.  69  :  22,  23, 
which  is  attributed  to  David,  in  the  heading  as  wtll  as  by  Paul, 
Many  argue  that  some  parts  of  the  Psalm  point  to  a  date  after  the 
captivit}-.  But  the  references  to  the  house  of  God  (ver.  9),  the  de- 
scription of  the  opposers  (ver.  8),  and  other  passages,  seem  to  prove 
that  the  date  was  much  earlier.  The  Psalm  is  a  portrayal  of  the  suf- 
ferings of  the  Servant  of  .lehovah  at  the  liands  of  spiritual  foes, 
rather  than  of  the  sorrows  of  the  exiled  .Jews.  The  latter  reference 
gives  to  the  imprecations  a  nrtional  and  personal  character  which 
seems  revolting.  The  former  points  to  a  Messianic  fulfilment,  and 
justifies  the  Apostle's  application  of  the  passage.  The  ioiprecations  of 
the  Psalm  '  are  to  be  considered  as  the  language  of  an  ideal  person, 
representing  the  whole  class  of  righteous  sufferers,  and  particularly 
Him  who,  though  He  prayed  for  His  muiderers  while  dying  (Luke 
28  :  .34),  had  before  applied  the  words  of  this  very  passage  to  the  un- 
believing .Jews  (Matt.  23:  38),  as  Paul  did  afterwards'  (J.  A.  Alex- 
ander).—Let  their  table.  In  the  Psalm  the  'table'  represents  the 
material  enjoyments  of  life  ;  here  it  is  referred  by  some  to  the  law,  or 
to  the  presumptuous  confidence  the  Jews  had  in  it ;  but  it  is  not 
necessary  to  define  it  so  closely. — Be  made  a  snare  ;  be  turned  into 
this. — And  a  trap,  'The  word  more  usually  signified  'a  hunt,"  or 
the  act  of  taking  or  catching, — but  here  a  net,  the  instrument  of  cap- 
ture. It  is  not  in  the  Hebrew  nor  in  the  Septuagint,  and  is  perhaps 
ieserted  by  the  Apostle  to  give  emphasis  by  the  accumulation  of  syno- 
nymes'  (AKord). — And  a  stumbling  block.  This  phrase  follows 
the  next  one  in  the  LXX.  The  lefercnce  to  hunting  probably  led  to 
the  transposition. — A  recompense  unto  them.  Here  the  Apostle 
varies  slightly  from  the  form  of  the  LXX.,  which  preserves  the  sense, 
but  not  the  figure  of  the  Hebrew.  In  fiict  tnis  phrase  is  an  interpre- 
tation of  the  entire  verse.  '  While  they  think  they  are  consuming  the 
spoils  of  their  earthly  sense,  they  become  themselves  a  spoil  to  every 
form  of  retrihut'on"  (Lange). 

Ver.  10.  Let  their  eyes  be  darkened,  etc.  The  reference  is 
not  to  old  age.  but  to  some  more  sudden  blinding.  This  verse  explains 
the  '  recompense '  of  ver.  9.  Spiritual  blindness  is  one  form  of  the 
punishment. — And  bow  thou  down  their  back  alway.  The  He- 
brew means  :  '  make  their  loins  to  waver,'  but  the  LXX.,  here  followed 
closely,  presents  the  same  thought  under  another  figure.  Present  loss 
of  strength  is  meant,  representing  spiritual  servitude,  under  the  yoke 
of  legalism,  rather  than  that  of  Roman  conquerors, — Meyer  thinks  the 


11:  11]  ROMANS  XI.  185 

Chapter  11:  11-36. 

The  Rejection  of  Israel  is  not  Final. 

11  *I  say  then,  Did  they  stumble  that  they  might  fall? 
God  forbid  :  but  by  their  ^  fall  salvation  is  come  unto 

*  Begin  the  paragrapli  here  instead  of  at  ver.  13. — Am.  Com.       i  Or,  trespass. 

retribution  is  for  want  of  faith  in  Christ ;  Godet,  with  more  reason, 
says  '  the  rejection  of  Jesus  by  the  Jews  was  the  effect,  not  the  cause  of 
the  hardening.  The  cause— Paul  has  said  clearly  enough  chap.  9  :  31- 
33) — was  the  obstinacy  of  their  own  righteousness.' 

II.    The  Rejection  of  Israel  is  not  Final,  vers.  11-36. 
(The  division  of  paragraphs  proposed  by  the  Am.  Com.  is  much  to  be  preferred.) 
In  this  section  is  presented  the  prospective  solution  of  the  great  historical  problem, 
discussed  in  this  part  of  the  Epistle.     Here  Paul  becomes  a  prophet ;  revealing  that 
the  rejection  of  Israel  is  not  final,  since  the  chosen  people  will  be  restored. 

The  section  naturally  falls  into  four  parts  :  (1.)  The  present  hardening  of  so  many 
of  the  Jews  will  not  result  in  the  final  rejection  of  the  nation,  but  will  accomplish  two 
ends :  first,  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles,  and  secondly  their  own  restoration,  to  be 
'  life  from  the  dead ' ;  vers.  11-15.  (2.)  In  view  of  this,  the  Gentiles  should  not  exalt 
themselves  over  the  Jews,  since  the  restoration  of  the  latter  to  spiritual  blessings  is  an 
event  both  desirable  and  probable ;  vers.  lG-24.  (3.)  The  Apostle  makes  known,  by 
revelation,  the  final  conversion  of  Israel,  showing  that  this  is  in  accordance  with  pro- 
phecy, and  with  the  general  principles  which  underlie  God's  dealings  with  men;  vers. 
2.3-32.  (4.)  The  thought  of  ver  32  leads  to  a  doxology,  which  forms  the  climax  of  the 
Epistle;  .rers.  33-36.  This  doxology  forms  an  appropriate  conclusion,  first  to  this 
section,  then  to  the  discussion  of  chaps.  9-11,  and,  finally,  to  the  entire  doctrinal  part 
of  the  Epistle. 

Yer.  11.  I  say  then.  Comp.  ver.  1.  This  introduces  a  possible, 
but  incorrect,  inference  from  ver.  7  ('  the  rest  were  hardened '). — Did 
they  stumble  that  they  might  fall.  The  form  of  the  question 
points  to  a  negative  answer.  The  fact  of  stumbling  is  not,  however, 
denied,  since  that  has  been  afi&rmed  in  chap.  9 :  32,  33,  nor  yet  the 
existence  of  aDivine  purpose  ('that'  =  in  order  that)  in  connection 
with  that  fact,  but  as  the  context  shows,  the  Apostle  denies  that  this 
purpose  was  the  final  fall  (?.  e.,  eternal  destruction)  of  the  nation.  The 
first  '  they '  refers  to  the  unbelieving  mass  of  the  nation,  but  the  second 
evidently  applies  to  them  as  representing  the  nation  as  a  whole.  As 
individuals  they  both  stumbled  and  fell,  but  the  design  was  not  that 
the  nation  should  fall.  This  view  alone  accords  with  the  close  of  the 
chapter. — But  by  their  fall,  or,  '  trespass.'  The  word  '  fall '  suggests 
a  correspondence  with  the  verb  '  should  fall,'  whereas  the  reference  is 
to  'stumble.'  At  the  same  time  'trespass'  is  not  quite  satisfiictory. — 
Salvation,  etc.     This  was  the  historical  fact,  and  this  fact  had  as  its 


186  ROMANS  XI.  [11:12,13. 

12  the  Gentiles,  for  to  provoke  them  to  jealousy.  Now 
if  their  fall  is  the  riches  of  the  world,  and  their  loss 
the  riches  of  the  Gentiles ;  how  much  more  their  ful- 
ness ? 

13  *  But  I  speak  to  you  that  are  Gentiles.     Inasmuch 

*  See  ver.  11. 

purpose :  to  provoke  them  to  jealousy,  or,  '  emulation.'  The 
salvation  of  the  Gentiles  was  therefore  the  immediate  purpose,  but 
there  was  a  further  design,  namely,  bringing  about  the  final  salvation 
of  the  Jews  by  stirring  them  up  to  emulation,  or,  zeal  ('jealousy  '  has 
a  bad  sense  not  implied  in  the  original).  This  twofold  purpose  forms 
the  theme  of  the  whole  section. 

Ver.  12.  Now  if  their  fall  is,  etc.  'If  is  logical,  not  condi- 
tional; ver.  11  has  stated  the  fact  here  assumed.— Their  loss.  The 
word  rendered  'loss  '  means,  becoming  inferior,  suffering  defeat.  But 
the  contrast  with  '  fulness '  suggests  here  a  numerical  sense :  the 
reduction  in  number  of  the  Jewish  people,  'inasmuch,  namely,  as  the 
unbelieving  portion  by  its  unbelief  practically  seceded  from  the  peo- 
ple of  God'  (Meyer).  The  rendering  of  the  R.  V.  may  be  taken  nu- 
merically or  explained  as  meaning  '  impoverishment.'  The  word  can- 
not mean  '  minority,'  and  this  view  is  otherwise  objectionable.  The 
fact  that  the  nation,  regarded  as  the  people  of  God,  had  been  thus  re- 
duced proved  to  be  the  riches  of  the  Gentiles,  i.  e.,  thus  the  Gen- 
tile nations  were  enriched  through  the  gospel  preached  to  them.  This 
is  parallel  to  the  previous  phrase,  '  the  riches  of  the  world,' — How 
much  more  their  fulness.  '  Fulness  '  has  three  senses  :  (1.)  that 
with  which  anything  is  filled  ;  (2.)  that  which  is  filled,  the  state  of 
fulness;  (3.)  the  act  of  filling.  The  first  sense  is  most  common,  and 
is  to  be  accepted  here  in  the  numerical  sense  (comp.  ver.  25) :  that 
which  fills  up  the  nation  to  compltteness.  If  the  diminution  of  Israel 
through  unbelief  had  such  a  blessed  result,  how  much  more  their  full 
number  when  they  as  a  nation  become  believers.  Some  find  here 
their  full  restoration,  or  blessedness,  contrasted  with  their  'loss.'  But 
this  leaves  out  of  view  the  numerical  sense,  giving  to  both  the  con- 
trasted terms  a  less  obvious  meaning,  and  identifies  the  thought  of 
this  verse  with  that  of  ver.  15.  The  reference  to  the  filling  up  of  the 
number  of  the  elect  is  far-fetched.  Many  fanciful  views  of  the  verse 
have  been  presented. 

Ver.  13.  But  I  speak  to  you  that  are  Gentiles.  '  But '  is 
better  supported  than  '  for.'  The  clause  implies  the  preponderance  of 
Gentile  Christians  in  the  congregation  at  Rome.  We  do  not  regard 
vers.  13,  14  as  parenthetical,  but  as  meeti  ig  a  thought  which  might 
arise  in  the  minds  of  the  Gentile  readers,  namely,  that  his  ministry, 
as  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  had  no  reference  to  the  Jews.  He 
shows  that  the  blessed  results  to  the  Jews  formed  a  part  of  the  pur- 
pose of  his  labors  (ver.  14).     Others  think  the  implied  objection  re- 


11:  14,  15.]  ROMANS  XI.  187 


then  as  I  am  an  apostle  of  Gentiles,  I  glorify  my  min- 
u  istry  :  if  by  any  means  I  may  provoke  to  jealousy 

them  that  are  my  flesh,  and  may  save  some  of  them. 
15  For  if  the  casting  away  of  them  is  the  reconciling  of 

the  world,  what  shall  the  receiving  of  them  be,  but 

lates  to  the  prominence  given  to  the  Gentiles  in  God's  purpose  re- 
specting the  Jews.  But  it  is  unlikely  that  tbe  Gentiles  would  raise 
such  an  objection.  Godet  differs  fro:u  both  views,  and  finds  in  these 
verses  a  proof  that  the  \poitle  was  laboring  for  the  ultimate  benefit  of 
the  Gentiles  by  seeking  the  conversion  of  the  Jews,  since  the  latter 
would  result  in  'life  from  the  dead'  (ver.  15),  and  thus  bring  bless- 
ing to  the  Gentiles.  But  the  first  view  is  to  be  preferred. — Inas- 
much then,  etc.  'Then'  is  well  supported,  and  disconnects  the 
clause  from  what  precedes.  The  clauses  should  be  separated  by  a  colon. 
Others  explain:  'I  say  to  you  Gentiles,'  inasmuch,'  etc.  But  '  then' 
opposes  this  view. — I  am,  etc. ,  '  I '  is  emphatic  here. — I  glorify  my 
ministry;  i.e.,  his  ministry  to  the  Gentiles.  'Glorify'  is  not  = 
praise,  or,  magnify ;  the  meaning  is,  by  ftiithfully  discharging  the 
duties  of  this  specific  ministi-y  he  could  do  honor  to  it.  The  original 
suggests  that  there  is  anoth9r  phase  of  the  subject,  which  is  stated 
(though  not  in  exact  correlation)  in  the  next  verse. 

Ver.  15.  If  hy  any  msans.  Comp.  chap.  1:  10.  The  faithful 
dischai;^e  of  his  duty  to  t'le  Gentiles  had  this  a?  its  attempted  result. — 
Tasm  that  are  my  fl3sh  ;  comp.  chap.  9:  3. — Save  some  of 
them,  i.  e.,  of  the  Jews.  Notice  the  modesty  of  the  expression, 
which,  however,  recalls  Paul's  ill-success  among  his  own  countrymen. 
This  tone  opposes  the  view  that  he  is  here  apologizing  for  the  mention 
of  the  Gentiles. 

Ver.  15.  For  Intro  luces  the  reason  for  vers.  18,  14:  his  labor 
was  in  view  of  the  mjre  blessel  results  indicated  in  the  close  of  this 
verse  — Tne  casting  awrfy  of  them,  i.  e.,  the  exclusion  of  the 
Jews  through  their  unbelief,  analogous  to,  but  not  precisely  identiaal 
with,  'diminishing'  (ver.  12). — Is  the  reconciling  of  the  •world. 
Their  unbelief  cccasionel  the  preaching  of  'reconciliation'  (comp. 
chap.  5:  11)  t:)  the  Gentiles;  many  Gentiles  were  actually  reconciled 
to  God,  and  this  was  the  token  of  the  design  and  adaptation  of  the 
gospel  for  the  whole  world. — What  shall  the  receiving  of  them 
be.  The  reception  to  salvation  of  the  Jewish  jiatiou  as  a  whole ; 
comp.  ver.  12,  where  the  numerical  phase  of  the  comparison  is 
brought  out.  That  they  would  be  thus  received,  is  the  leading  thought 
of  the  entire  chapter. — But  (lit.,  'if  not')  life  from  the  dead. 
Evidently  the  Apostle  has  in  mind  something  beyond  '  the  reconciling 
of  the  world,'  some  greater  blessing  than  the  gradual  conversion 
of  the  Gentiles  through  the  gospel,  and  this  he  terms  'life  from  the 
dead.'  Explanations:  (1.)  The  literal  xiew:  the  resurrection  from  the 
dead  will  follow  the  conversion  of  Israel.     This  view  has  been  held  by 


188  ROMANS  XI.  [11 :  16. 

16  life  from  the  dead  ?     And   if  the  firstfruit  is  holy, 
so  is  the  lump :  and  if  the  root  is  holy,  so  are  the 

many  commentators,  "both  ancient  and  modern,  but  with  various 
modifications.  Some  add  to  this  view  speculations  of  whicli  the  Apos- 
tle, here  at  least,  gives  no  hint  whatever.  Objections  :  (a.)  The  use 
of  '  life '  not  '  resurrection  ; '  the  former  Avord  often  having  a  wide  sig- 
nificance ;  (b.)  the  absence  of  the  article  before  '  life,'  which  is  strange 
if  Paul  meant  to  indicate  an  event,  to  which  he  so  often  refers  ;  (e.) 
the  lack  of  evidence  from  other  passages  of  scripture  that  the  resur- 
rection will  immediately  follow  the  conversion  of  the  Jews.  The  lat- 
ter event  may  be  closely  connected  with  the  final  acts  of  the  present 
dispensation,  but  prophecy  seems  to  point  to  other  events  as  interve- 
vening.  Mej'er  and  others  meet  sOme  of  these  objections  by  including 
the  life  which  follows  the  resurrection  as  its  blessed  consequence.  (2.) 
The  figurative  explanation  refers  the  phrase  to  a  new  spiritual  life 
which  will  be  introduced  by  the  conversion  of  the  Jews.  To  this  it 
may  be  objected,  (a.)  that  it  presents  no  further  thought  than  the 
previous  '  reconciliation ;  '  (6.)  that  the  language  of  the  remainder  of 
the  verse  is  literal ;  (c.)  that  the  upholders  of  this  view  are  not  agreed 
as  to  Avhat  the  new  and  surprising  spiritual  blessing  is,  which  thus 
surpasses  the  present  effects  of  the  gospel.  These  objections,  how- 
ever, do  not  seem  to  us  as  weighty  as  those  to  the  preceding  view. 
New  Testament  prophecy  does  not  as  yet  demand  specific  interpreta- 
tion. That  a  figurative  expression  might  occur  here  scarcely  needs 
proof.  Godet,  in  accordance  with  his  view  of  ver.  13,  applies  this 
phrase  to  the  blessedness  of  Gentile  Christendom  in  consequence  of 
the  conversion  of  Israel,  while  others  limit  it  to  the  Jews  themselves. 
We  prefer  the  wide  reference  to  the  entire  body  of  believers.  To 
combine  the  two  views  seems  improper,  a?  Meyer  affirms,  yet  his  own 
explanation  scarcely  differs  from  a  combination  of  the  literal  and  figu- 
rative interpretation. 

Yer.  16.  And,  not,  *  for  '  (A.  V.).  Tnis  suggests  a  reason  for  ex- 
pecting this  '  receiving'  of  the  Jews,  namely,  the  consecrated  charac- 
ter impressed  on  this  people,  when  they  were  separated  from  other 
nations.  This  moral  necessity  for  the  restoration  of  the  Jews  becomes 
the  theme  of  the  rem  linder  of  tlie  chapter,  both  in  its  warning  to  the 
Gentiles  (vers.  17-21)  and  iu  the  positive  statements  respecting  the 
future  of  Israel  (vers.  25-32). — The  first-fruit  is  holy.  This  is  as- 
sumed, the  reference  being  to  the  portion  of  dough  taken  as  a  peace- 
offering,  so  that  the  whole  lump  (of  kneaded  dough)  from  which  it 
was  taken  was  thereby  consecrated.  The  first-fruits  of  the  field 
are  certainly  not  meant.  The  '  firstfruit,'  it  is  generally  agreed, 
refers  to  the  patriarchs  (some  limit  the  application  to  Abra- 
ham), with  whom  the  covenant  was  made  by  which  Israel  became  the 
theocratic  people.  '.Holy'  here  means  'consecrated'  (comp.  1  Cor.  7: 
11),  and  the  underlying  argument  resembles  that  of  vers.  1-2. — If 
the  root,  etc.    The  parallelism  leads  us  to  find  here  the  same  thought 


11:  17.]  ,  ROMANS  XI.  189 

17  branches.  But  if  some  of  the  branches  were  broken  off, 
and  thou,  being  a  wild  olive,  wast  grafted  in  among 
theuL,  and  didst  become  partaker  with  them   ^of  the' 

1  Many  ancient  authorities  read  of  the  root  and  of  the  fatness. 

as  in  the  previous  clause,  but  under  another  figure,  which  admits,  as 
the  other  did  not,  of  an  application  to  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles 
(so  Godet).  The  attempts  to  explain  the  two  clauses  diflferently  have 
not  been  successful,  e.,  g.,  Christ,  the  first-fruit;  the  patriarchs,  the 
root ;  or  Christ,  both  first-fruit  and  root  ;  the  first-fruit,  the  believing 
Jews,  and  the  'lump'  the  mai-s  of  unbelievers.  'God,  in  selecting 
the  Hebrew  patriarchs,  and  setting  them  apart  for  His  service,  had 
reference  to  their  descendants  as  well  as  to  themselves  ;  and  designed 
that  the  Jews,  as  a  people,  should,  to  the  latest  generations,  be  spe- 
cially devoted  to  Himself.  They  stand  now,  therefore,  and  ever  have 
stood,  in  a  relation  to  God  which  no  other  nation  ever  has  sustained ; 
and  in  consequence  of  this  relation,  their  restoration  to  the  Divine 
favor  is  an  event  in  itself  probable,  and  one  which  Paul  afterwards 
teaches  (ver.  25)  God  has  determined  to  accomplish'  (Hodge). 

Ver.  17.  But  if  some  of  the  branches  were  broken  off. 
This  was  the  fact,  and  the  Gentiles  are  warned  against  a  wrong  infer- 
ence from  it.  '  Some  '  does  not  of  itself  indicate  whether  there  were 
many  or  few  ;  it  was,  however  probably  chosen  '  in  order  not  to  pro- 
mote Gentile-Christian  self-exaltation  ;  ver.  18  '  (Meyer)  ;  comp.  chap. 
3  :  3.  The  term  'broken  off'  is  that  used  of  the  removing  of  barren 
twigs. — And  thou,  emphatic  and  addressed  to  the  individual  Gen- 
tile believer,  being,  although  thou  art,  a  wild  olive,  ?'.  e.,  a  branch 
of  the  wild  olive  tree,  since  the  word  here  used  may  be  regarded  as 
an  adjective.  The  reference  to  the  tree  is  objectionable,  for  the  Gen- 
tiles are  addressed,  not  as  a  whole,  but  as  individuals. — Wast  graft- 
ed in  among  them,  or,  '  in  their  place.'  Either  view  is  gram- 
matically admissible,  but  the  former  is  preferable,  especially  because 
of  the  word  'fellow-partaker'  which  follows,  and  because  'them' 
points  to  'the  branches,'  referring  to  the  Jews  in  general.  It  is  quite 
improbable  that  Paul  alludes  to  the  custom  of  renewing  the  fertility 
of  olive  trees  by  grafting  upon  them  shoots  of  the  wild  olive.  There 
is  no  evidence  that  he  knew  of  this  custom  ;  nor  is  the  illustra- 
tion furthered  by  the  thought  thus  suggested.  The  Gentile  scion  was 
to  receive,  not  to  impart,  fertility.  Moreover  ver.  24  shows  that  the 
Apostle  conceives  of  the  matter  as  taking  place  through  grace  and 
contrary  to  nature. — And  didst  become  partaker  with  them,  i, 
e.,  the  natural  branches,  of  the  root  of  the  fatness  of  the  olive 
tree.  Some  of  our  best  manuscripts  omit  '  and,'  thus  giving  the 
sense  as  above  ;  but  the  other  reading  is  also  well  supported.  The 
former  presents  the  'root'  as  the  source  of  the  '  fatness,'  the  vitality 
and  fertility  ;  the  latter  indicates  that  the  graft  is  partaker  of  both. 
The  ideas  are  substantially  identical.     As  regards  the  application  :  it 


190  ROMANS  XI.  [11:  18-20. 

18  root  of  the  fatness  of  the  olive  tree;  glory  not  over 
the  branches :  but  if  thou  gloriest,  it  is  not  thou  that 

1^  bearest  the  root,  but  the  root  thee.  Thou  wilt  say 
then,  Branches  were  broken  off,  that  I  might  be  grafted 

20  in.  Well ;  by  their  unbelief  they  were  broken  off, 
and  thou  standest  by  thy  faith.     Be  not  highminded, 

is  historically  true  that  the  Roman  and  Greek  civilization,  already 
decaying  in  Panl's  time,  was  preserved  during  the  succeeding  cen- 
turies mainly  by  the  new  religious  life  from  the  patriarclial  root.  The 
unity  of  the  Church  in  both  dispensations  is  plainly  asserted,  and  this 
overthrows  all  the  assumptions  of  an  antagonism  between  Paul  and 
the  Twelve,  in  regard  to  the  relative  position  of  tiie  Jewish  and  Gen- 
tile Christians. 

Ver.  18.  Glory  not  over  the  branches,  ?.  e.,  the  people  of  Is- 
rael, not  the  branches  which  had  been  broken  off.  In  ver.  19  the  lat- 
ter are  specifically  indicated.  The  warning  has  never  been  without 
an  application  to  us  Gentile  Christians. — Bat  if  thou  gloriest ;  the 
verb  is  the  same  as  before,  and  is  unusual.  We  may  supply  in  thought 
'  against  them.'^ — ^It  is  not  thou  that  bearest  the  root,  etc.  This 
is  the  fact  which  should  prevent  this  disdainful  attitude  to  the  Jews. 
'  The  Gentiles  had  been  brought  into  fellowship  with  the  patriarchs, 
not  the  patriarchs  with  them.     Salvation  was  from  the  Jews '  (Hodge). 

Ver.  19.  Thou  wilt  say  then  ;  despite  the  last  consideratfon, 
'  although  we  are  borne  by  the  root  of  the  patriarchs,  yet  natural 
branches  have  been  talcen  away,  and  their  place  is  now  ours.'  This 
has  been  the  presumptuous  attitude  of  too  many  during  all  the  Chi-is- 
tian  centuries. — Branches  -were  broken  off,  etc.  The  article  is 
omitted  by  the  best  authorities ;  the  reference  is  to  '  some  of  thfe 
branches'  (ver.  17). — I  is  emphatic. 

Ver.  20.  "Well.  Not  necessarily  ironical ;  but  an  admission  of 
both  the  fact  and  the  purpose  of  the  breaking  off  of  the  branches. 
The  Apostle,  hoAvever,  passes  immediately  to  the  cause  of  this  state  of 
things,  '  as  one  which  must  prevent  haughtiness,  and  inspire  fear  and 
anxiety  respecting  the  duration  of  the  state  of  grace  ;  assigning  the 
reason  in  ver.  21  '  (Meyer).— By  their  unbelief.  The  form  is  the 
snme  as  in  the  other  phrase  by  thy  faith  ;  the  Greek  article  in  each 
case  being  equivalent  to  the  possessive  pronoun,  though  both  terms 
may  be  used  abstractly.  '  Thou '  is  emphatic,  while  standest  refers 
to  the  position  as  a  branch,  rather  than  to  standing  as  opposed  to  fall- 
ing.—Be  not  highminded  :  be  not  haughty.  A  few  older  manuscripts 
give  a  slightly  different  form  (answering  to  that  in  chap.  12:  16), 
which,  however,  must  be  taken  in  the  same  sense.— But  fear.  '  Fear 
is  opposed,  not  to  faith,  but  to  superciliousness  and  security'  (Bengel). 
The  reason  is  added  in  yer.  21,  with  which  these  clauses  should  be 
joined. 


11:21-23.]  ROMANS  XL  191 

21  but  fear :  for  if  God  spared  not  the  natural  branches, 

22  neither  will  he  spare  thee.  Behold  then  tlie  goodness 
and  severity  of  God :  toward  them  that  fell,  severity ; 
but  toAvard  thee,  God's  goodness,  if  thou  continue  in 
his  goodness :    otherwise  thou  also  shalt  be  cut  off. 

23  And  they  also,  if  they  continue  not  in  their  unbelief, 
shall  be  grafted  in :  for  God  is  able  to  graft  them  in 

Yer.  21.  For  if  God  spared  not,  as  had  been  the  case,  the 
natural  (lit.,  'according  to  nature')  branches,  /.  e.,  the  Jews  who 
were  not  ingrafted  but  original  branches  of  the  patriarchal  tree, 
neither  "will  he  spare  thee.  The  more  ancient  authorities 
omit  the  word  rendered  '  lest,'  which  made  it  necessary  to  supply 
'take  heed,'  or,  'it  is  to  be  feared'  (Meyer).  Internal  gi'ounds  may 
be  urged  in  favor  of  the  longer  reading,  but  the  manuscript  authority 
is  decisive  against  it.  '  Spare '  implies  such  an  attitude  in  the  person 
addressed  as  merits  condemnation,  so  that  nothing  need  be  supplied. 

Ver.  22.  Behold  then.  The  exhortation  of  ver.  20  ('  Be  not 
high-minded,  but  fear')  is  virtually  repeated  in  vers.  22-24,  but  now 
as  an  inference  ('therefore')  from  ver.  21. — The  goodness  and 
severity  of  God.  The  former  word  is  rendered  '  kindness  in  Eph. 
2  :  7  and  elsewhere  ;  the  latter  is  the  inflexible  rigor  of  justice  ;  both 
refer  to  the  manifestations  of  God's  attributes,  rather  than  to  the  at- 
tributes themselves. — Toward  them  that  fell ;  the  unbelieving 
Jews,  the  figure  of  the  branches  being  dropped  for  the  moment. — 
Severity.  This  vforA  is  in  the  nominative,  according  to  the  weightier 
authorities,  and  we  may  supply  '  there  is.' — But  toward  thee, 
God's  goodness;  the  nominative  is  the  correct  form  here  also,  and 
the  word  '  God's'  is  abundantly  supported. — If  thou  continue,  etc. 
This  is  the  common  language  of  warning  to  Christians  ;  the  passage 
should  not  be  used  for  or  against  the  doctrines  of  perseverance,  irre- 
sistible grace,  etc.  Moreover  the  warning  is  addressed  to  the  Gentiles 
as  individualized,  not  to  an  individual  Gentile. — Otherwise,  or,  '  see- 
ing that  otherwi.^e,'  the  last  word  being  implied,  not  expressed. — Thou 
also  shalt  be  cut  ofif.  The  word  is  a  strong  one,  as  if  the  branch 
were  taken  off  with  a  sudden  stroke  of  the  axe.  The  warning  is  for 
every  one  of  us  Gentile  Christians,  and  the  wider  application  seems 
more  appropriate  than  ever.  Should  judgment  come  on  what  is  termed 
Christendom  for  its  failure  to  abide  in  God's  goodness,  the  cutting  oflF 
will  be  final ;  no  promise  remains  as  in  the  case  of  the  Jewish  nation; 
see  next  verse. 

Yer.  23.  And  they  also,  i.  e.,  the  unbelieving  Jews,  who  are 
like  wild  olive  branches.  The  verse  should  not  be  joined  too  closely 
with  ver.  22,  since  it  presents  a  further  thought. — Continue  ;  the 
same  word  as  in  ver.^2. — Their  unbelief;  as  in  ver.  20. — For  God 
is  able,  etc.  When  unbelief  ceases.  His  power  will  be  manifested. 
It  is  implied  that  even  when  broken  off  it  is  easy  for  God  to  graft 


192  ROMANS  XL  [H:  24,  25. 

24  again.  For  if  thou  wast  cut  out  of  that  which  is  by 
nature  a  wild  olive  tree,  and  wast  grafted  contrary  to 
nature  into  a  good  olive  tree :  how  much  more  shall 
these,  which  are  the  natural  branches,  be  grafted  into 
their  own  olive  tree  ? 

25  For  I  would  not,  brethren,  have  you  ignorant  of 
this  mystery,  lest  ye  be  wise  in  your  own  conceits,  that 
a  hardening  in  part  hath  befallen  Israel,  until  the  ful- 

them  in  again,  as  it  was  to  graft  in  the  wild  olive  branches.  The 
next  verse  shows  that  such  a  result  is  more  to  be  expected,  not  that  it  is 
easier  for  God  to  do  this. 

Ver.  24.  For  introduces  the  entire  verse  as  a  proof  of  the  pro- 
bability that  the  Jews  will  ultimately  be  grafted  in  again,  not  of  the 
statement  that  God  is  able  to  graft  them  in  (against  Godet).  If  God's 
power  is  in  question,  it  is  needless  to  prove  that  He  could  more  easily 
do  one  thing  than  another. — If  thou  "wast,  etc.  The  fact  in  the  case 
of  the  Gentiles  is  stated  under  the  same  figure ;  contrary  to  nature 
suggesting,  not  the  greater  difficulty,  but  the  antecedent  improbability 
of  the  fact.  All  notions  of  additional  life  imparted  by  the  grafts  are 
here  shown  to  be  foreign  to  the  Apostle's  thought. — How  much 
more  shall  these,  -which  are  the  natural  branches  (the  phrase 
above  rendered  'by  nature'),  those  who  sprang  from  the  original 
patriarchal  root.  'In  the  former  case,  that  of  the  Gentile,  the  fact  of 
natural  groicth  is  set  against  that  of  engrafted  groicth  :  whereas  in  the 
latter,  the  fact  of  congruity  of  nature  (*•  their  own  olive  tree")  is  set 
against  incongruity, — as  making  the  re-engrafting  more  probable  '  (Al- 
ford).  The  tree  is  not  merely  'their  own,'  but  it  is  God's;  He  re- 
members His  covenant.  What  is  here  shown  by  a  figure  to  be  pro- 
bable, the  Apostle  next,  declares  will  certainly  take  place. 

Ver.  25.  For  I  would  not,  brethren,  have  you  ignorant. 
The  Apostle  by  this  form  of  words  introduces  something  especially 
important.  '  Brethren'  is  addressed  to  the  whole  body  of  Christians, 
who  were,  however,  mostly  Gentiles.  The  decisive  proof  ('for')  that 
the  Jews  shall  be  grafted  in  again  (vers.  23,  24)  is  found  in  the  prophetic 
announcement  now  made  by  the  Apostle  (vers.  25-32). — Of  this  mys- 
tery. In  the  New  Testament  the  word  '  mystery,'  does  not  have  the 
classical  sense,  but  usually  refers  to  a  matter  of  fact,  undiscovered  by 
men  themselves,  which  is  made  known  to  them  by  revelation  from  God. 
'  Thus  it  frequently  denotes  with  Paul  the  Divine  counsel  of  redemp- 
tion through  Christ,  as  a  whole,  or  in  particular  parts  of  it,  because  it 
was  veiled  from  men  before  God  revealed  it  (chap.  16:  25;  1  Cor.  2: 
7-10  ;  Eph.  3  :  3-5).  Whether  the  contents  of  a  mystery  have  already 
become  known  through  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  may  be  gathered 
from  the  scope  of  the  particular  passages'  (Meyer).  Here  the  event 
revealed  is  future,  hence  Paul  speaks  prophetically,  assuming  that  the 


11:  26.]  ROMANS  XI.  193 

26  ness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in  ;  and  so  all  Israel  shall 
be  saved :  even  as  it  is  written, 

There  shall  come  out  of  Zion  the  Deliverer ; 

contents  of  the  mystery  were  as  yet  unknown  to  his  readers.  He  re- 
garded the  revealed  fact  as  a  very  important  one,  and  as  standing  in 
intimate  relations  to  the  greatest  mystery  of  all :  the  Personal  Christ. — 
Lest  ye  be  wise  in  your  own  conceits ;  they  were  in  danger 
of  cherishing  their  gwn  incorrect  views  in  regard  to  the  future  of 
Israel ;  the  Apostle  would  prevent  this  by  telling  them  the  truth  re- 
vealed to  him.  (There  is  a  variation  of  reading  here  which  does  not 
alter  the  sense.) — That  a  hardening  in  part  hath  befallen 
(lit.,  '  hath  become  to  ')  Israel.  '  That '  introduces  the  contents  of  the 
mystery  (extending  to  the  word  'saved'  in  ver.  26).  'Hardening' 
(not,  '  blindness',  comp.  ver.  7)  is  preferable  to  '  hardness,'  since  the 
process  rather  than  the  state  is  indicated.  '  In  part'  is  to  be  joined 
with  the  verb,  not  with  'hardening'  (as  the  R.  V.  seems  to  suggest)  or 
'  Israel.'  The  '  hardening'  has  been  spoken  of  in  ver.  7,  but  the  ex- 
tent of  it  is  here  revealed.  This  thought  would  check  the  pride  of  the 
Gentiles.— Until  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in.  This 
is  the  second  fact  revealed,  namely,  that  this  hardening  ('in  part') 
will  continue  until  another  event  occurs.  No  other  explanation  is 
grammatical;  comp.  Luke  21 :  24.  Most  modern  commentators,  though 
ditfering  as  to  the  exact  sense  of  the  word  '  fulness,'  agree  in  referring- 
the  phrase,  '  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles,'  to  the  totality  of  the  Gentiles, 
not  including  every  individual,  but  the  nations  as  a  whole.  It  is  more 
than  '  a  great  multitude,'  denoting  rather  the  great  majority.  Some 
refer  it  to  the  '  complement '  from  the  Gentiles  to  take  the  place  of  the 
rejected  Jews,  but  this  seems  unnatural.  'Come  in'  points  to  their 
entrance  among  the  people  of  God,  conceived  of  throughout  as  one. 

Vei*.  26.  And  so  ;  in  this  manner  and  after  this  event.  This  is 
connected  with  ver.  25,  and  is  the  third  and  crowning  fact  of  the 
'mystery.'— All  Israel  shall  be  saved.  This  statement  has  been 
narrowed  in  many  ways  (see  Lange,  Romans,  p.  370),  and  on  th»  other 
hand  the  obvious  sense  has  been  loaded  down  with  notions  to  which 
Paul  does  not  allude,  here  or  elsewhere.  The  view  now  generally 
adopted  is:  that  the  ancient  people  of  God  (so  marvellously  preserved 
in  their  distinctive  life,  as  if  in  earnest  of  this)  shall  be  restored,  as 
a  nation,  to  .God's  favor.  As  in  ver.  25,  it  is  not  implied  that  every 
individual  Jew  will  be  converted  ;  but  probably  the  proportion  will  be 
greater  than  in  the  case  of  the  Gentiles,  since  'all'  is  more  definite. 
We  must  also  place  in  connection  with  this  statement,  the  argument  of 
vers.  12  and  15.  But  respecting  the  details  of  this  restoration  of  the 
Jews  as  a  body,  little  has  been  revealed.  The  picture  is  everywhere 
drawn,  only  in  broad  outline.  The  attempt  to  fill  it  out  has  always 
produced  a  reaction,  which  has  opposed  even  the  obvious  literal  sense 
of  the  clause.  Luther,  Calvin,  and  others  of  the  reformers  denied  the 
reference  to  the  Jewish  nation,  mainly  on  dogmatic  grounds.  Whether 
13 


194  ROMANS  XI.  [11 :  27,  28. 

He  shall  turn  away  ^  ungodliness  from  Jacob : 

27  And  this  is  ^my  covenant  unto  them, 
When  I  shall  take  away  their  sins. 

28  As  touching  the  gospel,  they  are  enemies  for  your  sake : 
but  as  touching  the  election,  they  are  beloved  for  the 

^  Gr.  ungodlinesses.  2  Gr.  the  covenant  from  me. 

Paul  expected  this  to  occur  sooner  or  later  does  not  affect  the  points 
revealed  ;  chronological  and  prophetical  nearness*  are  not  necessarily 
identical.  The  lengthening  term  of  Israel's  unbelief  presents  cumu- 
lative evidence  that  Israel's  preservation  is  to  the  end  that  'all  Israel 
shall  be  saved.'— Even  as  it  is  written.  There  has  been  much  dis- 
cussion as  to  the  passage  or  passages  here  cited,  since  similar  expres- 
sions are  not  infrequent  in  the  Old  Testament.  The  simplest  explana- 
tion is  that  the  Apostle  freely  cites  from  Is.  59:  20,  21,  appending  a 
clause  from  Is.  27  :  9  ('when  I  shall  take  avfay  their  sins  ').  The  va- 
riations are  not  greater  than  in  many  other  citations.  The  view  that 
the  Apostle  merely  gives  the  general  sense  of  many  predictions  is  very 
objectionable. — The  prophecies  are  introduced  to  confirm  the  last  state- 
ment :  '  and  thus  all  Israel  shall  be  saved.'  But  that  prediction  is 
made  by  the  Apostle  himself,  who  here  presents  a  warrant  for  it,  not 
lis  ground  [so  Tholuck  and  others). — There  shall  come  out  of  Zion. 
The  Hebrew  reads:  'And  (or,  then)  shall  come  tor  Zion  a  Deliverer, 
and  for  those  turning  from  apostacy  in  .Jacob.'  The  LXX.  has  'on' 
account  of  Zion,'  which  the  Apostle  changes  into  'out  of  Zion.'  The 
reason  for  this  change  is  not  obvious,  but  it  seems  to  express  more 
fully  the  thought  so  common  in  Isaiah,  that  the  Deliverer  should  sf.i'ing 
out  of  Israel.  'The  Deliverer'  is  evidently  the  Messiah.  'And,' 
which  occurs  in  the  LXX.  is  omitted  here  by  the  best  authorities.  The 
second  clause  refers  to  the  work  of  the  Deliverer,  which  results  in  the 
conversion  of  Israel. 

Ver.  27.  And  this,  /.  e.,  what  follows,  is  my  covenant  (the 
covenant  from  me)  unto  them.  From  the  same  passage  in  Isaiah, 
but  the  second  clause  is  from  Is.  27 :  9. — When  I  shall  take  away 
their  sins.  Meyer  rightly  explains  the  verse  thus :  '  And  when  I 
shall  have  forgiven  their  sins,  this  (this  remission  of  sins  conferred  by 
me)  will  be  my  covenant  to  them  {i.  e.,  they  will  therein  have  from  me 
the  execution  of  my  covenant).'  This  reference  to  the  taking  away  of 
sin  was  more  appropriate  to  the  Apostle's  purpose  than  the  promise  of 
the  Spirit  which  follows  in  Is.  59:  21. 

Ver.  28.  This  verse  sums  up  the  previous  discussion. — As  touch- 
ing the  gospel.  The  two  clauses  correspond  ;  '  as  touching '  is  more 
litei-ally  'according  to,'  i.  e.,  according  to  the  relation  of  the  gospel  to 
believers  and  unbelievers,  offering  salvation  to  them  who  believe,  and 
proving  those  who  reject  it  as  under  the  Divine  wrath,  they  (the  un- 
believing Jews,  at  that  time  including  the  mass  of  the  nation)  are 
enemies.     Not  his  enemies,  nor  yet  enemies  of  the  gospel,  but  the 


11:29,30.]  ROMANS  XT.  19o 

29  fathers'  sake.     For  the  gifts  and  the  calling  of  God 

30  are  ^without  repentance.     For  as  ye  in  time  past  were 
disobedient  to  God,  but  now  have  obtained  mercy  by 

1  Gr.  not  repented  of. 

objects  of  God's  wrath;  comp.  chap.  5:  10. — For  your  sake;  as 
explained  in  the  previous  discussion,  see  ver.  11. — But  as  touching 
the  election.  As  regards  the  fact  that  Israel  was  the  chosen  nation. 
This  is  simpler  than  to  take  '  the  election  '  as  referi  ing  to  the  elect 
remnant  among  them,  or,  to  the  whole  elect  church.  The  former  view 
fails  to  establish  the  very  point  of  the  contrast,  and  the  latter  impro- 
perly introduces  the  Gentiles. — Beloved,  ?'.  e.,  of  God,  for  the  fath- 
ers' sake.  This  is  another  statement  of  what  has  been  indicated 
throughout;  ' they  are  still  regarded  with  peculiar  favor,  because  de- 
scended from  those  patriarchs  to  whom  and  to  whose  seed  the  promises 
were  made'    (Hodge). 

Ver.  29.  For  the  gifts  and  the  calling  of  God  are  -without 
repentance  ;  not  subject  to  recall.  The  a  ijective  rendered  'without 
repentance  '  occurs  elsewhere  in  the  New  Te^^tament,  only  in  2  Cor.  7  : 
10.  Tliis  general  principle  of  Gods  dealings  is  the  basis  of  the  latter 
half  of  ver.  28.  The  fact  that  God  had  once  bestowed  His  gilts  upon 
Israel,  and  called  them  to  become  His  people,  proves,  on  this  principle, 
that  they  are  still  beloved  for  the  sake  of  their  fathers.  The  principle 
is  universal,  but  here  the  application  is  national,  hence  both  'gifts ' 
ami  '  calling '  are  not  to  be  limited  to  spiritual  gifts  to  individuals,  and 
to  eifectual  calling,  or  to  election.  Ijtill  less  should  the  former  be  re- 
ferred to  the  Jews,  and  the  latter  to  the  Gentiles.  The  Jewish  nation 
had  special  endowments  from  God,  chief  among  these,  or  rather  the 
cause  of  all  these,  was  the  calling  of  the  nr.tion  as  the  theocratic  peo- 
ple to  whom  the  Messiah  was  promised.  All  was  in  accordance  with 
God's  covenant,  hence  the  irrevocableness.  In  what  way  this  spiritual 
restoration  of  the  Jews  will  aifect  their  national  life  is  not  stated. 
God's  fjiithfulness  to  His  covenant  is  the  truth  of  most  practical  value. 

Ver.  30.  For  introduces  statements  fvers.  30-32)  showing  how  the 
course  of  God's  dealings  as  a  whole,  to  Gentiles  and  Jews^  Avill  estab- 
lish the  principle  there  announced. — Ye,  Gentiles,  in  time  past 
•were  disobedient  to  God.  That  this  disobedience  was  the  result 
of  unbelief  has  been  clearly  established  by  the  Apos^tle  (chap.  1:  18, 
etc.),  but  '  have  not  believed'  is  not  the  sense  of  the  original.  'In 
time  past'  points,  as  usual,  to  the  time  before  converi-ion. — Now, 
since  they  became  Christians;  comp.  Eph.  2:  8. — Obtained  mercy; 
all  their  blessings  as  Chi'istians  are  summed  up  as  the  result  of  the 
mercy  of  Him  to  whom  they  had  been  disobedient. — By  the  disobe- 
dience of  these,  i.e.,  the  unbelieving  Jews.  Their  'unbelief  is, 
however,  characterized  here  as  'disobedience.'  How  their  disobedience 
became  the  occasion  of  the  Gentiles  obtaining  mercy  has  already  been 
shown. 


196  EOMANS  XL  [11:  31,  32. 

31  their  disobedience,  even  so  have  these  also  now  been 
disobedient,  that  by  the  mercy  shewn  to  you  they  also 

32  may  now  obtain  mercy.     For  God  hath  shut  up  all 
unto  disobedience,  that  he  might  have  mercy  upon  all. 

Ver.  31.  Even  so;  the  cases  are  parallel. — Elave  these  (Jews) 
also  no-w,  since  the  gospel  of  Christ  was  preached,  been  disobe- 
dient;  lit.,  'were  disobedient,'  as  in  ver.  SO,  but  'now'  compels  us 
to  render  '  have  been  disobedient.' — That,  in  order  that,  by  the 
mercy  sho"wn  to  you  (lit.,  'jour  mercy;'  in  emphatic  position  in 
the  original)  they  also  may  now  obtain  mercy.  The  leading 
thought  of  the  section  (ver.  11)  is  here  re)>eated,  in  the  final  summing 
up.  This  view  is  so  natural  and  accords  so  entirely  with  the  parallel- 
ism as  to  forbid  the  explanations  of  the  Vulgate,  Luther,  and  others  ; 
'  they  have  not  believed  in  the  mercy  shown  to  you,'  or,  '  were  dis- 
obedient through  the  mercy  shown  to  you.' 

Ver.  32.  For.  This  introduces  another  general  principle  of  God's 
dealings.  It  serves  to  e.stablish  vers.  30,  31,  especial!)'  the  latter, 
which  is  but  a  re-statement  of  the  entire  discussion  since  ver.  11. 
'  Thus  ver.  32  is  at  once  the  grand  summary  and  the  glorious  key -stone 
— impelling  once  more  to  the  praise  of  God  (ver.  33  sqq.) — of  the 
whole  preceding  section  of  the  Epistle'  (Meyer),  i.  e.,  of  chaps.  9-11. 
— God  hath  shut  up  all.  The  verb  means  'to  shut  up'  as  in  a 
prison  (not  necessarily  'shut  up  together');  'them'  is  improperly 
supplied,  as  if  the  Jews  only  were  meant.  'AH'  refers,  however,  to 
persons  ;  comp.  Gal.  3  :  22,  where  '  all  things '  occurs. — Unto  diso- 
bedience ;  comp.  vers.  30,  31.  This  shutting  up  of  all  unto  disobe- 
dience is  an  effective,  not  simply  a  declarative  or  permissive,  activity  of 
God.  In  the  developmert  and  punishment  of  sin — not  in  its  origin — 
He  orders  all  things?  so  that  this  result  occurs  with  the  further  pur- 
pose, that  he  might  have  mercy  upon  all.  This  gracious  design 
has  already  been  indicated  in  vers.  30,  31.  'All'  here  refers  to  per- 
sons, and  is  to  be  interpreted  in  the  light  of  other  passages,  particu- 
larly Gal.  3  :  22.  To  explain  it  as  meaning  'all  nations'  is  to  weaken 
it ;  to  limit  it  to  the  '  elect'  is  contrary  to  the  paralh  1,  and  to  the  fact 
that  the  showing  of  mercy  here  on  the  earth  seems  to  be  indicated  (so 
Godet).  To  refer  it  to  the  ultimate  salvation  of  all  indlvidaals  without 
exception,  is  contrary  to  Gal.  3:  22  (where  'all'  is  qualified  by 
'  them  that  believe'),  to  many  other  passages,  and  introduces  a  me- 
chanical and  fatalistic  theory  of  Di'\ine  operations.  The  verse,  how- 
ever, sheds  light  on  the  profound  mystery  of  sin.  It  will  be  overruled 
through  the  more  profound  and  exalted  plan  for  general  blessing. 
The  universality  of  sin  is  overborne  by  the  universality  of  Divine 
grace;  comp.  chap.  5:  12  sqq.;  1  Cor.  15:  21,  22.  Here  this  univer- 
sality is  presented  mainly  with  reference  to  the  proffering  of  mercy, 
not  its  efficiency.  God  makes  to  every  one  (how  we  may  not  always 
perceive)  this  proffer,  but  it  is  nowhere  stated  that  all  men  are  acta- 


11:   33-33.]  ROMANS  XL  197 

33  O  the  depth  ^of  the  riches  ^both  of  the  wisdom  and 
the  knowledge  of  God !   how  unsearchable  are   his 

34  judgements,  and  his  ways  past  tracing  out!     For  who 
hath  known  the  mind  of  the  Lord?  or  who  hath  been 

35  his  counsellor?  or  ^vho  hath  first  given  to  him,  and  it 

1  Or,  of  the  riches  and  the  wisdom  &c.  -  Or,  both  of  ivisdom  &c. 

ally  redeemed.  Belief  and  unbelief  are  antithetical,  and  only  through 
the  former  is  grace  accepted.  Redemption  is  not  a  matter  of  force, 
b;;t  of  freedom  ;  of  freedom  on  God's  part  as  well  as  man's.  And  the 
Apostle  by  the  doxology  which  follows  teaches  us  to  leave  what  we  can- 
not understand  in  this  matter  to  the  wisdom  of  this  Free  Being.  We 
have  learned  Paul's  meaning  only  when  we  can  join  in  this  ascription 
of  praise. 

^  er.  33.  O  the  depth  of  the  riches  both  of  the  •wisdom 
and  the  knowledge  of  God!  With  Chrysostom  and  most  modern 
commentators,  we  prefer  the  view  of  the  passage  indicated  in  the 
margin  of  the  R,.  Y.  to  that  given  in  the  text.  Either  is  grammatical; 
the  former,  however,  is  not  only  more  natural,  but  agrees  better  with 
what  follows.  'The  depth  of  the  riches'  may  refer  to  the  fulness  of 
God's  grace,  as  shown  in  the  preceding  discussion,  or  be  taken  in  a 
wider  sense,  as  if  to  say:  '  How  superabundantly  rich  is  God !'  (Meyer). 
The  depth  of  God's  '  wisdom  '  is  in  His  wise  ordering  of  all  the  means 
for  His  civn  gracious  ends;  the  depth  of  His  'knowledge,'  in  His  all- 
inclusive  foreknowledge  of  ends  and  means.  These  constitute  an 
ocean,  the  depths  af  which  we  should  ever  explore,  but  can  never 
fathom.  In  these  three  words  Origen  found  an  allusion  to  the  Trinity 
(as  in  ver.  30);  but  however  applicable  the  terms  might  be  to  the 
attributes  of  Jehovah  manifested  by  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost, 
it  is  not  proper  to  assert  that  the  Apostle  intended  to  make  any  such 
distinction  in  this  verse.  (The  second  margin  of  the  R.  V.  suggests 
an  improbable  view,  connecting  '  of  God '  with  the  word  '  knowledge ' 
only. )— How  unsearchable,  etc.  The  discrimination  between  'wis- 
dom' and  'knowledge'  seems  to  be  implied  here ;  judgements  are 
the  decisions  (not  exclusively  judicial)  of  God's  wisdom,  according  to 
which  He  acts ;  these  are  'unsearchable.' — His  ways,  the  general 
modes  of  procedure,  in  accordance  with  His  infinite  knowledge,  are 
'untraceable;'  the  adjective,  from  the  word  meaning  'foot-print,'  is 
aptly  used  with  'ways.'  Precisely  because  this  is  true,  God  is  an 
inexhaustible  Object  for  our  minds  as  well  as  our  hearts. 

Ver,  34.  For  who,  etc.  The  Apostle  here  uses,  almost  exactly, 
the  language  of  Is.  40 :  13  ;  but  by  adding  '  for,'  he  makes  it  the  con- 
firmation of  what  precedes.  The  first  question  may  be  referred  to 
Gnd's  'knowledge'  and  '  His  ways,'  since  no  one  hath  known  the 
mind  of  the  Lord;  the  second  to  His  'wisdom,'  and  'judgments,' 
since  in  forming  His  decision  no  one  hath  been  his  counsellor. 

Ver.  35.     Or  who  hath  first  given,  etc.     This  is  from  Job  41 : 


198  ROMANS  XI.  [11:  36. 

36  shall  be  recompensed  unto  hira  again  ?  For  of  him, 
and  through  him,  and  unto  him,  are  all  things.  To 
him  he  the  glory  ^  for  ever.     Amen. 

1  Gr.  unto  the  ages. 
n,  follows  the  Hebrew,  not  the  mi«trinslat^'on  o^  t-ie  LXX.  This 
question  refers  to  the  depth  of  God's  riches.  No  gift  can  recompense 
God  ;  nothing  can  be  purchased  of  Him.  How  appropriate  to  tlie  en- 
tire discussion.  Tlie  gospel  is  all  of  grace ;  the  plan  respecting  Jews 
and  Gentiles  is  all  of  grace.  Nothing  of  merit  or  recompense ;  all 
freely  bestowed  out  of  the  ocean  depths  of  riches  in  God  Himself. 

Yer.  36.  For.  What  Avas  negatively  expressed  in  ver.  35,  is  now 
positively  stated  in  language  which  is  as  simple  as  it  is  sublime. — Of 
him,  as  the  original  Source,  Author,  Creator:  and  through  him,  as 
our  Preserver  and  Governor  and  Bountiful  Benef  ictor,  as  superior  to 
nature  which  He  created,  controlling  and  directing  it,  and  that  for 
His  own  ends,  since  the  Apostle  adds  :  and  unto  him,  are  all 
things.  All  things  (not  simply  all  persons)  will  carry  out  His  will, 
will  contribute  to  His  glory.  Human  thought  can  rise  no  higher  than 
this.  Attempts  have  been  made  to  refer  the  three  phrases  respectively 
to  the  three  Persons  of  the  Trinity,  but  the  second  and  third  preposi- 
tions do  not  seem  distinctly  applicable  to  the  Son  and  Holy  Spirit, 
Nor  does  the  train  of  thought  demand  such  an  explanation.—  To  him 
be  the  glory  forever  (Gr.,  <unto  the  ages').  Amen.  The  glory 
befitting  such  a  God  is  here  ascribed  to  Him;  '  unto  the  ages  '  is,  as 
usual,  equivalent  to  '  forever ; '  and  the  doxology  properly  closes  with 
the  solemn  '  Amen ; '  comp.  chaps.  1  :  25  ;  9  :  5.  This  doxology  is 
'  the  sublimest  apostrophe  existing  even  in  the  pages  of  Inspiration 
itself  (Alford).  Yet  how  logical  its  arrangement,  how  apt  its  argu- 
ment. It  forms  a  conclusion  to  the  section,  and  not  less  appropriately 
to  the  whole  discussion  in  chaps.  9—11,  in  fact,  to  the  whole  doctrinal 
part  of  the  Epistle.  The  greatest  treatise  on  God's  dealings  with 
men  ends,  not  OTily  with  praise  to  Him,  but  with  a  confession  of  His 
sovereignty.  This  which  so  exalts  God  does  indeed  humble  us.  But 
it  is  through  this  humility  that  we  too  are  exalted.  The  gospel  of 
grace  would  be  no  real  gospel  were  it  not  the  message  of  the  sovereign 
God  whom  the  Apostle  thus  adores.  He  only  has  practically  solved 
the  mystery  of  God's  sovereignty  and  our  free  will  who  can  join  in 
this  doxology.  It  is  our  privilege,  in  regard  to  the  great  mysteries  of 
humanity  as  well  as  in  the  personal  perplexities  which  meet  us,  it  is 
our  privilege  to  trust  and  praise  God,  when  we  can  no  longer  trace 
His  purposes.  As  Godet  well  remarks,  '  in  chap.  11  are  traced  the 
grand  outlines  of  the  philosophy  of  history,'  but  Paul's  philosophy  of 
history  ends  in  this  conception  of  God,  which  is  as  essential  for  our 
every  day  needs  as  for  the  solution  of  the  problem  of  man's  origin, 
history  and  destiny.  Rightly  then  the  Apostolic  'therefore,'  the 
practical  inference,  is  at  once  added.  Unless  Paul's  theism  is  ac- 
knowledged, and  his  praise  repeated,  his  ethics  are  powerless. 


12:  1.]  ROMANS  XII.  199 

Chapter  12  :  1-8. 

Practical  Theme  :  Duties  According  to  Special  Gifts. 

1      I  beseech  you  therefore,  brethren,  by  the  mercies 

PRACTICAL  PART.     CHAPTERS  12-16. 

man's    gratitude    for   free   salvation. 

The  theme  of  this  part  of  the  Epistle  is  given  in  chap.  12  :  1 :  The  believer  saved 
by  Christ  through  faith  is  to  present  himself  a  thank-offering  to  God;  all  Christian 
duty  is  praise  for  deliverance.  For  convenience  we  may  divide  this  portion  as 
follows: — 

I.  General  Exhortations;  based  directly  upon  the  theme;  chaps.  12,  13.  (Strictly 
speaking,  chap.  13  :  1-7  forms  a  special  discussion,  see  below  and  in  loco.) 

II.  Special  Discussion  regarding  the  scruples  of  certain  weak  brethren,  who  ab- 
stain from  eating  meat,  etc. ;  chaps.  14  :  1 — 15  :  13. 

III.  Concluding  Portion  :  personal  explanations,  greetings  to  and  from  various 
persons,  with  a  closing  doxology ;  chaps.  i5  :  14r— 16  :  27. 

Chapters  12,  13. 

I.  General  Exhortations. 

In  these  two  chapters  the  Apostle  gives  exhortations  respecting  Christian  duties, 
based  upon  the  controlling  obligation  to  present  ourselves  a  living  tbank -offering  to 
God.  Godet  distinguishes  these  precepts  as  pertaining  respectively  to  the  religiom 
(chap.  12)  and  to  the  civil  sphere  (chap.  13).  We  prefer  to  divide  into  sections  as  fol- 
lows: (1.)  Practical  theme:  duties  according  to  special  gifts;  chap.  12  :  1-8.  (2.) 
Duties  for  all  Christians  in  personal  relations,  springing  from  brotherly  love  and  ex- 
tending to  returning  good  for  evil;  chap.  12:9-21.  (3.)  The  Christian's  duty  to 
earthly  rulers;  chap.  13:  1-7.  (4.)  General  exhortation  to  love,  and  to  a  Christian 
walk;  chap.  13  :  8-14.  The  thoughts  are  linked  to  each  other  rather  than  arranged 
by  a  formal  method.  Other  divisions  readily  suggest  themselves,  but  this  will  prove 
as  convenient  as  any  other. 

1.  Practical  Thenie:  Duties  According  to  Special  Gifts,  vers.  1-8. 
The  theme  is  fully  stated  in  vers.  1,  2 ;  then  follows  an  exhortation  to  humility 
(vers.  3-5),  which  introduces  the  special  reference  to  various  gifts,  mainly,  but  not 
exclusively,  oflBcial  in  their  nature  (vers.  G-8). 

Ver.  1.  I  beseech  (or,  'exhort')  you  therefore,  brethren. 
The  connection  is  undoubtedly  with  the  conclusion  of  chap.  11  ;  but 
for  this  very  reason  the  practical  inference  is  from  the  entire  doctrinal 
part  which  culminated  in  that  passage.  'Beseech'  is  not  a  word  of 
legal  command,  but  an  appeal  addressed  to  Christians  whose  hearts,  it 
is  assumed,  will  respond  to  the  motives  on  which  the  appeal  is  based, 
'  Brethren,'  as  frequently  before.  The  notion  that  Paul  would  not 
thus  exhort  the  Christians  of  a  church  he  had  not  founded,  is  alto- 
gether unsupported.     Renan  and  others,  by  disputing  the  place  of 


200  ROMANS  XII.  [12 :  1. 

of  God,  to  present  yoar  bodies  a  living  sacrifice,  holy, 
^acceptable  to  God,  ichich  is  your  ^reasonable  *  ^service. 

1  Gr.  wel(-2}leasing.  ^  Or,  spiritual.  3  Or,  worship. 

*  For  reasonable,  read  spiritual  with  marg.  Gr.  btlonging  to  the  reason. — Am.  Com. 

chaps.  12, 13  (and  14)  in  this  Epistle,  reveal  an  entire  misapprehen- 
sion of  the  Apostle's  character.  The  man  who  really  believes  what  is 
contained  in  chaps.  1-11  could  not  fail  to  exhort  thus. — By  (lit., 
'  through')  the  mercies  (or,  'compassions')  of  God;  as  summed 
up  in  chap.  11  :  35,  36,  but  expounded  in  the  former  part  of  the 
Epistle.  These  are  called  to  mind  to  furnish  the  motive  for  obedience 
to  the  exhortation  ;  '  as  if  any  one  wisliincc  to  make  an  impression  on 
one  who  had  received  great  benefits,  were  to  bring  his  Benefactor  him- 
s-elf  to  supplicate  him'  (Chrysostom ).  'He  who  is  rightly  moved  liy 
the  merciij  of  God,  enters  into  the  entire  tvill  of  God'  (Beiigel). — To 
present.  The  word  is  used  of  bringing  for  sacrifice.  It  points  to  a 
single  act,  not  to  a  continued  process,  to  the  thankful  bringing  once 
for  all  of  the  cfifei-ing,  not  to  sacrificing  it. — Your  bodies.  This 
cannot  be  referred  to  the  body  as  the  seat  of  sin.  It  is  either  a  desig- 
nation of  the  entire  personality,  chosen  to  suit  the  figure  of  a  sacriii- 
cial  thank-offering,  or  the  body  is  specially  referred  to  as  the  organ  of 
practical  activity,  the  instrument  by  which  the  living  to  God  is  to 
manifest  itself.  There  is  no  objection  to  the  view  that  this  is  'an  in- 
dication that  the  sanctification  of  Christian  life  is  to  extend  to  that 
part  of  man's  nature  which  is  most  completely  under  the  bondage  of 
sin'  (Alford).  Meyer  takes  the  term  literally  here,  and  in  ver.  2 
another  reference,  '  so  that  the  two  verses  together  contain  the  sanctifi- 
cation of  the  whole  man  distributed  into  its  parts, — that  of  the  outer 
man  (set  forth  as  the  offering  of  a  sacrifice),  and  that  of  the  inner  (as 
a  renewing  transformation).'  But  the  phrnse  'reasonable  service' 
seems  to  oppose  this  distinction,  and  there  are  other  objections. — A 
living  sacrifice  ;  over  against  the  Levitical  offerings,  which  were  to 
be  slain.  We  indeed  die  to  sin,  but  live  unto  God  (comp.  cliap.  6 
throughout).  —  Holy,  acceptable  to  God;  these  terms  qualify 
'  sacrifice.'  This  offering  is  '  hoi}','  morally  pure  over  against  the  cere- 
monial purity  of  the  Levitical  offerings,  as  well  as  in  opposition  to  the 
previous  devotion  to  sin ;  it  is  '  well-pleasing  to  God,'  as  '  a  savor  of  a 
sweet  smell'  (comp.  Eph.  5:  2),  since  such  an  offering  is  not  only 
based  upon  the  expiatory  offering  of  Christ,  but  is  well-pleasing  to 
God,  whose  will  is  our  sanctification,  as  the  Apostle  declares  in  his 
earliest  Epistle  (1  Thess.  4  :  3). — "Which  is  your  reasonable  (spi- 
ritual) service.  This  explains  the  whole  clause:  'to  present,' etc. 
'Service'  is  used  of  religious  service,  or  worship.  The  centrist  un- 
doubtedly is  with  the  Old  Testament  ritual  service.  That  of  the  new 
covenant,  just  described,  is  characterized  as  'belonging  to  the  reason' 
(Am.  Com.,  marg.),  which  seems  to  be  nearly  equivalent  to  'spiritual' 
(1  Pet.  2  :  5),  over  against  the  external,  fleshly  service  (opus  opevitum). 
The  term  here  used  brings  out  this  contrast  better  than  •  spiritual,' 


12:  2.]  ROMANS  XII.  201 

2  And  be  not  fashioned  according  to  this  ^  world :  but 
be  ye  transformed  by  the  renewing  of  your  mind,  that 
ye  may  prove  what  is  ^the  good  and  ^acceptable  and 
perfect  will  of  God. 

1  Or,  age.      -  Or,  the  wUl  of  God,  even  the  tiling  which  is  good  and  acceptable  and  perfect. 
*  Gr.  well-pleasing. 

■which  might  improperly  suggest  that  the  Old  Testament  service  was  in 
it^=elf  Heshly,  in  the  ethical  sense.  Godet  explains  :  '  the  service 
which  answers  in  a  rational  manner  to  the  moral  premises  established 
in  the  faith  you  profess.'  But  the  phrase  refers  to  a  service  rendered 
by  the  reason  rather  than  one  demandedhy  the  reason  (comp.  Sanday). 
*A  Mosaic  sacrifice  might  be  a  purely  mechanical  offering,  in  which 
tlie  intelligence  had  no  part.  But  the  sacrifice  required  from  us,  since 
it  is  our  own  body,  can  be  offered  only  by  the  act  of  the  reasonable 
spirit  within'  (Beet).  In  any  case,  the  true  Christian  service  is  one 
of  self-dedication  to  God ;  only  this  is  well-pleasing  to  Him. 

Yer.  2.  And  be  not.  Some  of  the  best  authorities  give  the  in- 
finitive (not  the  imperative)  form  in  this  verse,  thus  connecting  it 
closely  with  'beseech'  (ver.  1).  The  tense  used  points  to  continued 
action. — Fashioned  according  to.  The  words  rendered  '  con- 
formed '  and  'transformed'  (A.  V.)  have  different  derivations;  the 
former  refers  more  to  the  outward  form  (the  noun  is  usually  rendered 
'fashion'),  the  latter  to  the  organic  form.  Some  deny  such  a  distinc- 
tion in  this  instance,  but  it  is  well  to  reproduce  the  verbal  variation  in 
English. — This  world,  or,  '  age ; '  comp.  Gal.  1:4;  Eph.  2 :  2. 
The  phrase  is  used  in  a  bad  sense. — But  be  ye  transformed,  or, 
'transfigured,'  as  in  Matt.  17:  2;  Mark  9:  2  (the  same  Avord  occurs 
in  2  Cor.  3:  18).  Here  also  a  continuous  process  is  indicated. — By 
the  renew^ing  of  your  mind.  This  is  the  instrument  of  the  trans- 
formation. The  'mind'  (comp.  chap.  7:  23,  25,  and  Excursus),  or, 
practical  reason,  is  naturally  under  the  dominion  of  the  flesh  ;  it 
needs  renewal,  which  is  wrought  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  faith  being  the 
subjective  element  of  its  operation.  Through  this  renewed  mind  there 
results  the  transformation  in  the  whole  man.  The  passive  suggests 
the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  while  the  exhortation  implies  moral 
freedom. — That  ye  may  prove,  or,  'in  order  to  prove,'  to  put  to  the 
practical  test,  -what  is  the  good  and  acceptable  and  perfect 
■will  of  God.  Not  simply  to  be  able  to  do  this,  but  actually  to  do  so, 
the  conscience  being  continually  educated  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  The 
inward  renewal  has  as  its  result  an  increasing  delicacy  of  judgment 
in  Christian  ethics,  the  will  of  God  respecting  our  conduct  in  the  world. 
The  practical  portion  of  this  Epistle  is  designed  to  help  to  this  judg- 
ment. The  marginal  rendering  is,  on  the  whole,  preferable.  The 
other  view  compels  us  to  take  '  acceptable '  in  the  sense  of  agreeable 
to  men.  What  God  wills  is  that  which  is  '  good,'  in  its  end,  '  well- 
pleasing  '  to  Him,  and  '  perfect '  as  uniting  these  two.    As  a  practical 


202  ROMANS  XII.  [12:  3-5. 

3  For  I  say,  through  the  grace  that  was  given  me,  to 
every  man  that  is  among  you,  not  to  think  of  himself 
more  highly  than  he  ought  to  think  ;  but  so  to  think 
as  to  think  soberly,  according  as  God  hath  dealt  to 

4  each  man  a  measure  of  faith.  For  even  as  we  have 
many  members  in  one  body,  and  all  the  members  have 

5  not  the  same  office :  so  we,  who  are  many,  are  one 

matter,  what  is  God's  will  in  our  particular  circumstances  is  deter- 
mined by  the  renewed  mind  prayerfully  seeking  what  is  good  and 
well-pleasing  and  perfect. 

Ver.  3.  For  I  say,  'The  special  requirement  which  h3  is  now  to 
make  serves  in  fact  by  way  of  confirmation  to  the  general  exhortation 
of  ver.  2'  (Meyer). — Through  the  grace  that  was  given  me. 
He  thus  refers  to  his  apostleship,  as  he  often  does  ;  humbly  making 
an  appeal  for  the  humility  he  enjoins. — To  every  man  that  is 
among  you  ;  applying  the  precept  to  each  and  all  without  exception. 
— Not  to  think  of  himself,  etc.  There  is  a  play  upon  words  in 
the  original  which  it  is  difficult  to  reproduce  in  English :  Alford  renders 
'not  to  be  highminded,  above  that  which  he  ought  to  be  minded, 
but  to  be  so  minded  as  to  be  sober-minded.' — But  so  to  think 
as  to  think  soberly,  or,  '  so  as  to  be  sober-minded.'  Some 
would  render,  '  but  to  be  so  disposed  as  to  be  sober  minded  ;  '  but  the 
reference  to  thought  of  one's  self  is  preferable.  The  aim  of  one's  self- 
knowledge  should  be  wise  discretion.  Practically  self-fsteem  leads  to 
indiscretion. — According  as  God,  etc.  This  clause  qualifies  the 
last  one  :  'to  think  so  as,'  etc. — To  each  man  a  measure  of  faith. 
The  article  is  wanting  before  '  measure,'  but  probably  it  refers  to  the 
particular  measure  in  each  case.  '  Faith'  is  here  subjective,  as  usual: 
and  the  entire  phrase  points  to  the  individual  Christian's  'receptivity 
of  grace  of  the  Spirit,  it<elf  no  inherent  congruity,  but  the  gift  and 
apportionment  of  God.  It  is  in  fact  the  subjective  designation  of  the 
grace  which  is  given  us;  ver.  6'  (Alford).  This  clause  prepares  the 
way  for  the  specifications  which  follow  (vers.  6-8)  which  show  that 
the  '  measure  of  fiiith '  is  difterent  in  degree  in  different  cases,  and 
adapted  to  peculiarities  of  character.  Since  this  standard  is  'as  God 
hath  dealt  to  each  one,'  there  is  no  room  for  thinking  too  highly  of 
ourselves. 

Ver.  4.  For  even  as  -we  have  many  members  in  one  body. 
The  parallel  here  set  forth  (vers.  4.  5)  is  more  fully  carried  out  in  1 
Cor.  12:  12,  etc.  In  Ephesians  (throuchout)  the  unity  is  emphasized, 
here  the  variety.  TJiis  variety  is  introduced  as  an  explanation  of  the 
variety  in  the  measure  of  faith,  and  hence  as  a  motive  for  the  humility 
enjoined. — Have  not  the  same  office,  or,  'activity,  e.  ^.,  eyes, 
ears,  hands,  etc. 

Ver.  5.  So   we    who  are    many,  not,  'being  many,'  but,  'the 


12:  6.]  ROMANS  XII.  203 

body  in  Christ,  and  severally  members  one  of  another. 
6  And  having  gifts  differing  according  to  the  grace  that 

many,'  like  the  many  members  of  the  body,  are  one  body  in 
Christ.  A  common  figure. — And  severally,  etc.  The  phrase 
is  very  unusual;  it  is  literally:  'and  what  (is  true)  as  to  indi- 
viduals, (they  are)  members  of  one  another.'  Christ  is  the  Head,  and 
fellowship  with  Him  makes  us  one  body,  and  in  consequence  the  in- 
dividual relation  is  that  of  fellow-member  with  every  other. 

Yer.  6.  And  having  gifts,  or,  '  having  however,'  etc.  Some 
would  connect  this  verse  grammatically  with  '  we  are  '  (ver.  5),  but  it 
seems  better  to  begin  a  new  sentence  here,  and  to  supply  the  proper 
imperatives,  as  is  done  in  the  A.  Y.  The  construction  in  the  Greek  is 
irregular,  whatever  explanation  be  given.  '  But '  makes  an  advance 
in  thought:  'and  not  only  so,  but'  (Alford).  'Then'  is  misleading. 
— Gifts  differing,  etc.  The  '  charisms  '  are  different,  but  all  having 
one  origin,  according  to  the  grace  that  was  given  to  us. 
This  is  the  same  thought  as  that  of  ver.  3 :  '  according  as  God  hath 
dealt,'  etc.  Seven  of  these  ditferiug  'gifts'  are  named,  and  made  the 
basis  of  a  corresponding  exhortation.  Four  of  these  seern  to  be  offi- 
cial gifts  (though  not  pointing  to  four  distinct  and  permanent  orders 
in  the  ministry),  the  last  three  probably  being  '  charisms,'  with  which 
no  special  official  position  was  connected.  The  reasons  for  making 
this  distinction  are :  omission  of  'or'  with  the  fifth  clause;  the  diffi- 
culty of  referring  the  remaining  gifts  to  official  persons  ;  the  change  in 
the  admonitions,  which  do  not  define  the  sphere  as  before,  but  the  mode. 
Furthermore,  we  might  expect  exhortations  to  private  Christians  after 
the  reference  to  'all  the  n.enibers '  in  vers.  4,  5.  (See  on  the 
several  clauses.) — Whether  prophecy.  This  is  the  first  'gift' 
named.  In  the  Bible  '  prophecy  '  on  the  one  hand,  includes  more 
than  the  prediction  of  future  events,  it  is  a  speaking  for  God  not 
merely  beforehand ;  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  identical  with  preach- 
ing. In  the  New  Testament  the  reference  is  to  the  gift  of  immediate 
inspiration,  for  the  occasion,  '  leading  the  recipient  to  deliver,  as  the 
mouth  of  God,  the  particular  communication  which  he  ha  I  received' 
(Hodge).  It  would  appear  from  the  statements  in  the  Book  of  Acts 
and  in  1  Corinthians,  that  the  gift  was  not  unusual,  and  that  the 
possessor  of  it  had  an  official  position.  The  office  of  the  Old 
Testament  prophet  -became  more  and  more  prominent  in  the 
period  of  the  Old  Dispensation,  but  in  the  New,  which  presents  a  gos- 
pel of  fact,  the  gift  was  not  permanent,  though  nee^lful  in  the  Apos- 
tolic times  and  held  in  the  highest  es'eem  (comp.  1  Cor.  14  :  1).  It 
dilfered  from  the  ecstatic  speaking  with  tongues.  This  view  of  the 
gift  opposes  any  attempt  to  inti-oduce  it  into  mo'lern  discussions  about 
church  offices. — According  to  the  proportion  of  our  faith, 
lit.,  '  the  faith.'  But  the  term  is  not  equivalent  to  a  body  of  doctrine ; 
comp.  chap.  1  :  5.  There  is  not  an  instance  in  the  New  Testament 
usage  up  to  the  time  when  the  Apostle  wrote,  which  requires  such  a 


204  ROMANS  XII.  [12:7,8. 

was  given  to  us,  whether  prophecy,  let  us  prophesy 

7  according  to  the  pi-oportion  of  ^  our  faith  ;  *  or  minis- 
try, let  us  give  ourselves  to  our  ministry ;  or  he  that 

8  teacheth,   to    his   teaching;    or    he   that    exhorteth, 

1  Or,  the  faith.  *  Omit  inarg.i — Am.  Com. 

sense.  (Hence  the  Am.  Com.  prefer  to  omit  the  margin  as  mislead- 
ing.) '  Faith '  here  means  the  subjective  '  believing,'  and  '  our  ftiith* 
is  as  appropriate  as  '  our  ministry  '  in  ver.  7.  The  entire  phrase,  with 
which  '  let  us  prophesy  '  is  properly  supplied,  is  equivalent  to  *  mea- 
sure of  faith.'  This  view  is  favored  by  the  context,  '  which  aims  at 
showing  that  the  measure  of  faith,  itself  the  gift  of  God,  is  the  recep- 
tive faculty  for  all  spiritual  gifts,  which  are  therefore  not  to  be  boasted 
of,  nor  pushed  beyond  their  provinces,  but  humbly  exercised  within 
their  own  limits  '  (Alford).  The  technical  theological  sense,  'the  ana- 
logy of  faith,'  seems  quite  inappropriate  here,  where  an  extraordinary 
gitt  of  prophecy  is  referred  to,  and  has  been  abandoned  on  lexical 
grounds  by  the  vast  majority  of  more  recent  commentators  (except 
Philippi,  Hodge,  and  Shedd).  That  this  sense  has  been  used  against 
grammatical  exegesis  is  a  matter  of  history.  The  simple  meaning  is  : 
even  when  a  man  is  thus  occasionally  inspired,  let  him  use  his  gift,  as 
he  has  ftiith  ;  the  gift  of  faith  limits  the  gift  of  prophecy.  'The  in- 
ward inspiration  and  the  outward  deliverance  must  keep  pace,  and 
advance  step  by  step  together.  Preaching  in  which  the  proportion  is 
not  observed  is  sure  to  become  rhetorical  or  insincere'  (Sanday). 

Ver.  7.  Or  ministry.  The  second  gift.  Some  refer  this  to  all  the 
permanent  offices  of  a  single  church,  taking  the  five  following  terms  as 
included  under  it.  The  change  of  construction  in  the  next  clause 
slightly  favors  this  view,  but  it  cannot  be  positively  established.  The 
usual  view  refers  it  to  the  diacojuite  (which  the  Greek  term  may  mean), 
namely,  the  gift  of  oversight  of  the  external  affairs  of  the  church. — 
Let  us  give  ourselves  to  our  ministry,  lit.,  'in  the  ministry,' 
just  spoken  of.  The  Pi.  V.  fairly  expresses  this  sense.  We  might 
supply,  '  let  us  be,'  since  the  exhortation  means,  let  us  render  service 
in  our  appointed  sphere,  therein  'be  instant'  (comp.  1  Tim.  4:  15). 
It  has  happened  ever  since  those  who  had  a  gift,  and  a  corresponding 
office,  for  the  external  affairs  of  the  church,  have  not  been  content  to 
limit  their  efforts  to  their  proper  sphere.— Or  he  that  teacheth,  to 
his  teaching,  lit.,  '  the  teaching,'  his  sphere.  This  refers  to  the  gift 
of  teaching  by  ordinary  methods  and  need  not  be  limited  to  any 
special  office.  Paul  was  himself  a  teacher.  This  gift  is  a  permanent 
one,  and  cannot  be  too  highly  prized  ;  the  danger  now  as  then,  is  the 
possessors  mistaking  his  gift,  or  stepping  outside  of  the  sphere  for 
which  it  adapts  him. 

Ver.  8.  Or  he  that  exhorteth,  to  his  exhorting,  lit.,  'the 
exhortation,'  which  is  his  sphere.  'Teaching'  was  directed  to  the 
understanding  ;  '  exhortation,'  rather  to  the  heart  and  Avill.     The  ex- 


12:8.]  ROMANS  XII.  205 

to  his  exhorting  :  he  that  giveth,  let  Mm  do  it  with 
^  liberality ;  he  that  ruleth,  with  diligence  ;  he  that 
sheweth  mercy,  with  cheerfulness. 

1  Gr.  singleness. 

horter  might  also  be  a  prophet,  but  the  habit  seems  to  have  been  to 
base  the  exhortation  on  a  passage  of  Scripture,  as  in  the  synagogue 
(comp  Acts  13  :  15).  It  is  impossible  to  find  here  any  permanent  of- 
fice in  the  church,  though  these  four  were  probably  the  basis  of  a  sub- 
sequent development  into  more  permanent  official  positions. — He 
that  giveth,  or,  'imparteth,'  let  him  do  it  -with  liberality, 
lit ,  'singleness.'  This  should  be  referred  to  all  who  have  the  'gift' 
of  imparting ;  private  Christians  as  well  as  the  official  almoners  of  the 
Church.  It  does  not  mean  the  imparting  of  spiritual  benefit,  but  of 
earthly  goods.  This  is  a  '  charism  '  which  many  may  have,  who  can 
do  little  else  for  Christ's  cause.  He  who  thus  gives  should  do  it  '  with 
singleness,'  i  e.,  '  without  any  selfishness,  without  boasting,  without 
secondary  designs,  etc.,  but  in  plain  sincerity  of  disposition  '  (Meyer). 
The  rendering  of  the  R.  V.  is  defended  by  many,  on  the  ground  that 
the  other  qualifications  referred  to  outward  character,  rather  than  to 
the  frame  of  mind.  But  this  sense  of  the  Greek  word  is  very  unusual, 
and  the  exhortation  to  simplicity  seems  both  appropriate  and  needful. 
Liberal  giving  is  far  easier  than  simple  giving. — He  that  ruleth, 
or,  '  presideth,'  with  diligence.  That  this  '  gift '  was  necessary  for 
the  presbyter  (the  ruler,  or,  bishop)  of  the  church,  is  quite  evident. 
But  since  the  preceding  and  subsequent  clauses  point,  either  to  private 
Christians,  or  to  the  deacons,  an  exclusive  reference  to  the  office  of 
presbyter  seems  out  of  place.  '  Diligence  '  should  characterize  the 
performance  of  duty  by  all  those  who  h?ive  the  gift  of  leadership. 
The  explanation  :  '  he  that  entertaineth  strangers,'  is  unsustalned  by 
good  evidence. — He  that  sheweth  mercy,  with  cheerfulness. 
This  also  refers  to  all  Christians  who  administer  help  and  comfort  to 
the  suflFering  Here  there  is  great  danger  of  rendering  perfunctory 
service,  hence  the  appropriate  exhortation  '  with  cheerfulness.' — The 
three  '  gifts '  which  private  Christians  also  have  might  far  more  fre- 
quently be  exercised.  Too  many  who  could  do  great  service  by  giving, 
presiding  (or,  performing  other  executive  duty),  and  showing  mercy, 
waste  their  energies  by  attempting  to  exhort  and  teach,  or  even  to  pro- 
phesy.    Let  each  prayerfully  consider  what  his  special  gift  is. 

The  hints  given  here  and  elsewhere  in  the  Epistles  do  not  support 
any  one  theory  of  church  polity.  This  whole  matter  seems  to  have 
been  in  process  of  development  during  the  Apostolic  age.  Of  fixed 
and  binding  usage  there  is  little  trace.  The  Apostle  says  little,  be- 
cause so  much  was  to  be  left  to  the  free  enactment  of  the  various 
bodies  of  Christians.  The  true  way  to  unity  will  doubtless  be  through 
liberty,  and  to  liberty  the  freedom  of  association  is  essential ;  and  to, 
freedom  of  association  variety  of  form  seems,  for  the  present  at  least 
to  be  equally  essential. 


206  ROMANS  XII.  [12:  9-11. 

Chapter  12:  9-21. 
Exhortations  for  all  CJiristlanSj  in  Personal  Relations. 

9  Let  love  be  without  hypocrisy.     Abhor  that  which 

10  is  evil ;  cleave  to  that  which  is  good.     In  love  of  the 
brethren  be  tenderly  aiFectioned  one  to  another;  in 

11  honour  preferring  one  another;  in  diligence  not  sloth- 

2.  Exhortation  for  all  Christians,  in  their  Personal  Relations,  from  Love 
of  the  Brethren  to  returning  Good  for  Foil,  vers.  9-21. 
(The  E,.  v.  does  not  begin  a  paragraph  here.)— All  the  precepts  of  this  section  are 
based  upon  Christian  love  (ver.  9).  After  exhorting  that  this  love  be  without  hypoc- 
risy, and  noting  the  moi-al  attitude  it  produces,  the  Apostle  gives  special  injunctions 
respecting  its  various  active  manifestations.  He  begins  with  tenderness  toward  the 
brethren  (ver.  10),  and  names  many  ways  in  which  Christian  love  outwardly  mani- 
fests itself  (vers.  11-13,  15,  16),  culminating  in  its  treatment  of  those  who  are  opposed 
to  us  and  have  injured  us  (vers,  li,  17-21). 

Ver.  9.  Let  love  (lit.,  'the  love')  be.  The  imperative  form  is  to 
be  supplied,  there  being  no  verb  in  the  Greek.  The  participles  which 
follow  are  to  be  explained  accordingly.  This  is  unusual,  but  not  vm- 
grammatical;  since  in  vers.  lG-19  this  construction  recurs.  The  arti- 
cle points  to  the  Christian  grace  they  al)-eady  possess,  and  'your  love' 
would  not  be  an  incorrect  rendering. — Without  hypocrisy;  comp. 
Jas.  3  :  ]  7.  This  brief  clause  is  the  title  of  the  entiie  section. — Ab- 
hor that  -which  is  evil,  etc.  Christian  love  will  manifest  itself  in 
this  abhorrence  of  what  is  morally  evil  and  permanent  adherence  to 
what  is  morally  good.  (It  is  not  necessary  to  restrict  the  adjectives 
to  what  is  injurious  and  what  is  kind.)  'Let  your  love  arise  from 
genuine  and  deep  emotion ;  let  the  basis  of  your  character  be  an  in- 
tense hatred  of  evil  and  as  strong  an  adhesion  to  God  '  (Sanday). 

Ver.  10.  In  love  of  the  brethren.  Here  also  the  article  occurs, 
implying  that  this  is  already  possessed.  '  In '  is  properly  supplied, 
but  the  exact  sense  is  '  with  respect  to.'  The  A.  Y.  inverts  the  em- 
phatic order  of  the  Greek  in  these  clauses. — Be  tenderly  afifec- 
tioned  one  to  another.  The  woi'd  is  that  applied  to  family  affec- 
tion, an  1  IS  properly  chosen  in  view  of  the  new  and  peculiar  relation 
of  Christian  brethren.  —  In  honour  preferring  one  another. 
Meyer  explains:  'going  before  as  guides,'  i.  e.,  with  conduct  that 
incites  others  to  follow.  Stuart:  'in  giving  honor,  anticipating  one 
another.'  The  former  is  probably  more  in  accordance  with  usage ; 
but  'in  honor  going  before  one  another'  would  suggest  the  reverse  of 
humility,  hence  we  do  not  alter  the  inexact  rendering  of  the  A.  V. 
Godet  paraphrases :  '  making  them  in  all  circumstances  pass  in  ad- 
vance of  yourselves.' 

Ver.  11.  In  diligence  not  slothful.  This  is  the  emphatic 
order  throughout,  but  it  is  restored  only  here  in  the  R.  V.     '  In  dili- 


12:  12-14.]  ROMANS  XII.  207 

I2ful;  fervent  in  spirit;  serving  4he  Lord;  rejoicing 
in  hope ;  patient  in  tribulation  ;  continuing  stedfastly 

13  in  prayer ;  communicating  to  the   necessities   of  the 

14  saints;  ^ given  to  hospitality.     Bless  them  that  per- 

1  Some  ancient  authorities  read  the  opportunity.  2  Gr.  pursuing. 

gence'  (the  same  word  as  in  ver.  8),  not,  'in  business;'  in  Avhat- 
ever  Christian  duty  requires  your  diligence,  do  not  be  slothful. — 
Fervent  in  spirit.  The  figure  is  that  of  seething,  boiling  like  a 
hot  spring;  hence  the  human  spirit  is  meant,  but  the  regenerated 
human  spirit,  since  Christians  are  addressed.  This  clause  is  op- 
posed to  mere  animal  excitement  in  our  diligence;  the  spirit  it- 
self must  be  stirred.  — Serving  the  Lord.  Some  ancient  authori- 
ties, by  a  variation  of  two  letters  {Haipu  for  Kvpuo)  sustain  the  reading 
of  the  R.  V.  marg.  This  means:  in  one's  daily  task  adapting  one's 
self  to  the  occasion,  to  the  circumstances  of  the  hour,  with  the  self- 
denying  discretion  of  true  love.  Aleph,  however,  decides  in  favor  of 
the  other  reading.  The  variation  can  readily  be  accounted  for.  The 
objection  that  so  general  a  precept  is  inappropriate  here  is  invalid. 
It  is  characteristically  I'auline  to  insert  a  distinctively  Christian  mo- 
tive in  his  minute  exhortations.  In  whatever  we  find  to  do  we  are 
not  only  to  be  active,  but  to  have  a  spiritual  enthusiasm,  which  is 
prompted  by  the  knowledge  that  all  our  doing,  however  humble,  is 
in  the  service  of  Christ. 

Ver.  12.  Rejoicing  in  hope,  or,  'in  hope,  rejoicing.'  The  hope, 
i.  e.,  the  thing  hoped  for,  is  the  ground  rather  than  the  object  of  the  joy. 
— Patient  (stedfast,  as  usually)  in  tribulation.  This  clause  follows, 
probably  because  the  Christian's  joyous  hope  produces  endurance  in 
affliction.— Continuing  stedfastly  in  prayer.  Neither  joy  nor 
endurance  is  abiding  without  such  constant  prayer. 

Ver.  13.  Communicating  to  the  necessities  of  the  saints; 
taking  part  in  these  necessities  as  your  own  ;  hence  relieving  them. 
'Communicating'  is  inexact,  as  also  in  Gal.  6:  6;  comp.  15:  17, 
where  the  verb  occurs  in  the  same  sense  as  here.  (Some  manuscripts 
present  a  curious  variation  in  this  clause,  substituting  for  'necessities' 
a  word  which  refers  to  the  days  consecrated  to  the  commemoration  of 
martyrs ;  apparently  an  intentional  corruption  of  the  text.)  All 
Christians  are  included  under  the*  term  '  saints.' — Given  to  hospi- 
tality, lit.,  'pursuing  hospitality.'  This  virtue  is  frequently  enjoined 
in  the  New  Testament,  and  was  especially  necessary  in  those  days, 
when  Christians  were  persecuted  and  banished.  The  early  Church 
responded  to  the  precept.  '  He  does  not  say,  practising,  hut purming, 
teaching  us  not  to  wait  for  those  that  are  in  need,  but  rather  to  run 
after  them  and  track  them  out'  (Chrysostom).  While  this  presses  the 
sense  of  the  word,  it  is  a  fair  inference. 

Ver.  14.  Bless  them  that  persecute  you,  etc.  '  The  saying 
of  Christ,  Matt.  5 :  41,  was  perhaps  known  to  the  Apostle,  and  here 


208  ROMANS  XII.  [12:  15,  16. 

15  secute  you ;  bless,  and  curse  not.     Rejoice  with  them 

16  that  rejoice ;  weep  with  them  that  weep.  Be  of  the 
same  mind  one  toward  another.  Set  not  your  mind 
on  high  things,  but  ^condescend  to  ^things  that  are 

1  Gr.  be  carried  away  icith.  •  Or,  them. 

came  to  his  recollection'  (Meyer).  It  is  quite  unlikely,  however,  that 
he  had  read  the  Gospel  of  Matthew.  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  was, 
doubtless,  well  known  through  oral  transmission,  and  there  are  allu- 
sions to  it  in  the  Epistles  (chap.  2:  19;  1  Cor,  7:  10;  Jas.  4:9; 
5:  12;  1  Pet.  3:  14;  4:  14).  The  word  rendered  'persecute'  is  the 
same  as  that  in  the  last  clause  of  ver.  13 ;  an  intentional  play  on 
words.  Probably  the  change  of  form  to  the  imperative  shows  how 
difficult  a  duty  this  was  felt  to  be.  '  How  hard  this  is  for  corrupt 
human  nature,  every  one  who  is  acquainted  with  his  own  heart  well 
knows.  Yet  this  is  the  standai'd  of  Christian  temper  and  character 
exhibited  in  the  Scriptures'  (Hodge).  Hardest  of  all  is  the  duty 
when  the  persecutor  is  9  professel  Christian  brother. 

Ver.  15.  Rejoice  •with  them,  etc.  The  infinitive  occurs  in  the 
original,  and  we  may  paraphrase :  '  it  is  necessary,  to  rejoice,'  etc. 
'  Ver.  14  defines  the  proper  conduct  in  relation  to  personal  anUpathi/ ; 
ver.  15,  the  proper  conduct  in  relation  to  personal  sympathy^  (Lange). 
The  verse  is  not  interjected,  nor  is  the  exhortation  weaker.  Sympathy 
is  not  less  difficult  than  forgiveness.  The  latter  is  less  active  thin  the 
former,  and  may  exist  when  the  range  of  Chi'istian  feeling  is  too  limi- 
tei  for  wide  and  quick  sympathy.  But  forgetfulness  of  self  is  the 
basis  of  both  virtues. 

Ver.  16.  B3  of  the  same  mind,  etc.  The  participial  form  recurs, 
but  the  force  is  still  imperative.  This  precept  refers  to  concord  in 
feeling,  though  not  to  the  exclusion  of  corresponding  thought  and 
endeavor. — Set  not  your  mind  on  high  things.  The  verb  is  the 
same  as  in  the  previous  clause  (lit.,  '  minding  the  same  ;  minding  not 
the  high  things ' ).  This  may  be  taken  as  a  general  warning  against 
ambition,  or  '  high  things  '  may  refer  to  the  distinctions  which  arise 
among  Christians  whether  social  or  official,  and  which  are  so  naturally 
sought  after.  The  latter  view  accords  with  the  common  rendering  of 
the  next  clause. — But  condescend  to  (be  carried  away  with)  things 
that  are  lowly.  It  is  difficult  to  aecide  whether  the  last  phrase  is 
ma33uliae  or  neuter,  the  game  form  being  used  for  both  genders. 
Meyer  accepts  the  latter  and  explains:  'yielding  to  that  which  is 
humble,  to  the  claims  and  tasks  which  are  presented  to  you  by  the 
humbler  relations  of  life  ; '  he  cites  Paul's  example,  as  tent-maker  and 
sufferer.  The  neuter  occurs  in  the  previous  clause,  but  the  adjective 
is  masculine  in  all  other  instances  in  the  New  Testament,  and  the 
next  clause  favors  the  reference  to  persons.  (So  A.  V.,  R.  V.  marg., 
Godet,  Sanday,  Brown.)  This  is  closely  connected  with  the  other  pre- 
cepts, for  such  self-sufficiency  iu  judgment  usually  attends  ambition, 


12:17-19.]  ROMANS  XII.  209 

17  lowly.  Be  not  wise  in  your  own  conceits.  Render  to 
no  man  evil  for  evil.     Take  thought  for  things  honour- 

18  able  in  the  sight  of  all  men.     If  it  be  possible,  as  much 

19  as  in  you  lieth,  be  at  peace  with  all  men.  Avenge  not 
yourselves,  beloved,  but  give  place  unto  ^  wrath :  *  for 
it  is  written,  Vengeance  belongeth  unto  me;  I  will 

1  Or,  the  wrath  of  God. 
*  Let  marg.  l  {the  wrath  of  God)  and  the  text  exchange  places. — Am,  Com. 

and  serves  to  foster  the  aristocratic  feeling,  which,  as  Godet  intimates, 
the  Apostle  opposes  throughout  this  verse.  Nothing  destroys  Christian 
fellowship  more  etfectually  than  this  conceit  of  wisdom, 

Ver.  17.  Render  to  no  man  evil  for  evil.  The  proper  treat- 
ment of  those  opposed  to  us  was  spoken  of  in  ver.  14,  and  from  this 
point  is  the  sole  topic  of  the  section.  'No  man'  who  injures  us, 
whether  Christian  brother  or  one  without,  so  in  ver.  14.     The  Apostle 

*  knew  only  too  well  by  experience,  that  in  the  bosom  of  the  Church  it- 
self one  could  encounter  malevolence,  injustice,  jealousy,  hate '  (Godet). 
The  principle  is  plain,  but  the  temptation  to  disobey  is  often  very 
strong.— Take  thought  for  things  honourable  in  the  sight  of 
all  men.  The  A.  V.  is  misleading,  conveying  to  the  ordinary  reader 
the  thought  that  we  are  bidden  to  provide  for  ourselves  and  our  families 
in  an  honest  way.  '  In  the  sight  of  all  men '  is  to  be  joined  with  the 
verb,  not  with  '  honorable.'  Man's  estimate  of  what  is  '  honorable  '  is 
not  the  standard ;  but  all   should  see  that  our  effort  is  for  what  is 

•  honorable.'  Hodge  finds  here  the  motive  for  the  preceding  exhor- 
tation :  '  let  a  regard  for  the  honor  of  religion  and  your  own  character 
prevent  the  returning  of  evil  for  evil,'  but  the  connection  is  not  obvious. 
The  care  for  things  honorable  might  serve  to  dispossess  the  desire  for 
retaliation. 

Ver.  18.  If  it  be  possible,  as  much  as  in  you  lieth ;  not,  *  if 
j/ou  can,''  but  if  it  be  possible,  if  others  allow  you  to  do  so,  be  at  peace 
■with  all  men.  That  this  is  sometimes  impossible,  the  Apostle's  life 
shows  ;  but  our  responsibility  extends  as  far  as  our  ability  to  keep  the 
peace. 

Ver.  19.  Avenge  not  yourselves,  beloved.  The  Greek  order 
is  properly  restored ;  the  address  becomes  more  affectionate,  in  order 
to  press  lovingly  thp  more  difficult  duty. — But  (or,  on  the  contrary) 
give  place  unto  the  wrath  of  God  (so  Am.  Com.).  This  seems  to 
be  the  only  sense  consistent  with  what  follows.  Let  God's  wrath  take 
its  course,  do  not  attempt  to  execute  it  yourself;  comp.  our  Lord's  con- 
duct, as  described  in  1  Pet.  2  :  23.  So  most  commentators,  but  a 
variety  of  untenable  explanations  have  been  given  :  '  defer  your  own 
wrath,'  a  Latinism,  and  not  the  meaning  of  Paul's  language  ;  give 
place  to  the  wrath  of  your  enemy,  either  by  letting  him  have  his  will, 
or  by  getting  out  of  its  way  ;  neither  of  them  suited  to  the  context,  or 
14 


210  EOMANS  XII.  [12:20,21. 

20  recompense,  saith  the  Lord.  But  if  thine  enemy 
hunger,  feed  him  ;  if  he  thirst,  give  him  to  drink  :  for 
in  so  doing  thou  shalt  heap  coals  of  fire  upon  his  head. 

21  Be  not  overcome  of  evil,  but  overcome  evil  with  good. 

in  harmony  with  the  tone  of  the  passage.  Alford  refers  it  to  anger  in 
general,  without  adding  anything  to  the  correct  interpretation.  'The 
moi-ality  of  this  precept  is  based  on  the  holiness  of  God  ;  hence  so  far 
as  love  and  wrath  are  the  two  poles  of  holiness,  it  does  not  exclude 
the  blessing  of  our  adversaries  jver.  14)  and  intercession  for  them' 
(Meyer). — For  it  is  written  (Deut.  32:  35),  Vengeance  belong- 
eth  unto  me  (lit.,  'to  me  is  vengeance')  ;  I  ■will  recompense  (a 
strengthened  form  of  the  word  used  in  ver.  17),  saith  the  Lord  (a 
formula  naturally  added  by  the  Apostle).  The  Hebrew  is :  '  Mine  is 
revenge  and  requital ; '  the  LXX.  reads  :  '  in  the  day  of  vengeance  I 
will  recompense.'  In  Heb.  10 :  30,  the  form  is  the  same  as  here,  which 
suggests  that  it  had  become  usual,  especially  as  it  occurs  in  the  para- 
phi'ase  of  Onkelos. 

Ver.  20,  But,  i.  e.,  'on  the  contrary,'  'nay  rather'  (Alford).  The 
authorities  present  several  variations  ;  but  the  oldest  manuscripts  and 
more  recent  editors  accept  '  but.' — If  thine  enemy,  etc.  The  rest 
of  the  verse  corresponds  exactly  with  Prov.  25:  21,  23  (LXX.)  and  is 
adopted  by  the  Apostle  without  a  formula  of  citation.  The  only 
difficulty  is  in  the  last  clause  ;  thou  shalt  heap  coals  of  fire  on 
his  head.  Explanations:  (1.)  Thou  wilt  thus  leave  him  to  severer 
Divine  punishment.  This  i^  opposed  by  the  next  verse,  and  contrary 
to  Prov.  24  :  17.  (2,)  Thau  wilt  prepare  for  him  the  glowing  shame 
of  penitenc3;  so  Augustine,  Meyer,  Godet,  and  many  others.  This  is 
not  open  to  any  serious  objection,  if  real  penitence  be  understood. 
Simply  to  make  him  ashamed  is  not  an  exalted  motive.  (3.)  Tkou 
wilt  by  this  kindness  most  readily  subdue  him,  thus  taking  the  most 
effectual  vengeance;  so  Alford,  Hodge,  and  others.  This  really  in- 
cludes (2),  and  is  favored  by  the  next  verse.  Tyndale"s  gloss  is: 
'This  means  that  thou  shalt  kindle  him  and  make  him  to  love.'  Be- 
•  sides  these,  f.  number  of  fanciful  interpretations  have  been  suggested. 

Ver.  21.  Be  not  overcome  of  evil,  /.  e.,  injury  done  you,  but 
overcome  evil  "with  good.  This  sums  up  the  entire  matter  re- 
specting the  treatment  of  adversaries  :  When  we  requite  evil  for  evil, 
we  are  overcome,  when  we  return  good  for  evil,  we  overcome  it.  So 
Chri.st  did  on  the  cross.  When  we  do  this,  we  achieve  the  gi-eatest 
victory  of  love :  we  win  by  yielding ;  we  gain  by  giving ;  we  avenge 
by  forgiving ;  we  conquer  by  forgetting  ourselves  so  as  to  return  good 
for  evil.  *  Men  whose  minds  can  withstand  argument,  and  whose  hearts 
rebel  against  threats,  are  not  proof  against  the  persuasive  influence  of 
unfeigned  love  ;  there  is,  therefoi-e,  no  more  important  collatei'al  reason 
for  being  good,  than  that  it  increases  our  power  to  do  good.'     (Hodge.) 


13:  1.]  ROMANS  XIII.  211 

Chapter  13 :  1-7. 

The  Christianas  Duty  to  Rulers. 

1      Let  every  soul   be  in  subjection  to  the  higher  pow- 
ers :  for  there  is  no  power  but  of  God ;  and  the  powers 

3.   The  Christian's  Duty  to  Rulers,  vers.  1-7. 

• 

This  exhortation  has  seemed  to  many  out  of  place,  since  in  ver.  8  the  precepts  re- 
sume their  general  character,  and  the  connection  with  what  proceeds  is  not  obvious. 
Some  liave  found  this  connection  in  the  persecuting  character  of  the  state;  others  dis- 
cover an  apologetical  design ;  others  again  find  reasons  for  the  exhortation  in  the 
special  circumstances  of  the  church,  while  Godet  thinks  that  the  Apostle  '  after  having 
shown  the  Christian  consecrating  his  body  to  the  service  of  God,  places  him  succes- 
sively in  tlie  two  domains  in  which  he  should  realize  the  sacrifice  of  himself:  that  of 
spiritual  life  properly  so  termed,  and  that  oi  civV  life.'  He  includes  vers.  8-10  in  this 
pection.  But  admitting  this,  we  may  yet  find  an  occasion  for  the  exhortation,  and 
one,  moreover,  which  serves  to  connect  it  with  the  closing  thought  of  the  last  chapter. 
The  Jews  in  Home  had  been  banished  from  the  city  for  a  time  by  the  Emperor  Clau- 
dius (a.  d.  51)  on  account  of  their  turbulent  spirit.  This  turbulence  was  doubtless  the 
result  of  the  political  character  of  their  .Messianic  expectations.  Nowhere  would  such 
a  rpsult  be  mure  pronounced  than  at  Eome,  and  the  Christians  there  though  not  Jewish, 
could  scarcely  fail  to  be  more  or  less  affected  in  the  same  way.  (This  view  is,  however, 
opposed  by  Weiss.)  It  is  no  reproach  to  them  to  a.ssume  that  they  had  not  yet  under- 
stood what  many,  even  now,  do  not  recognize,  namely,  that  the  freedom  of  the  gospel 
is  primarily  spiritual,  out  of  which,  by  degrees,  in  the  appointed  way,  a  reformation 
and  transformation  of  civil  relations  should  proceed.  Moreover,  the  character  of  the 
imperial  rulers  was  such  (Nero  was  then  Emperor),  that  the  exhortation  was  only  a 
epecihc  application  to  the  precept:  'overcome  evil  with  good'  (chap.  12:  21).  By 
obedience  to  this  exhortation,  under  such  rulers,  the  Church  of  Christ  won  her  moral 
victory  over  the  Roman  empire  and  heathendom.  When  she  exalted  herself  to  rule, 
instead  of  humbling  herself  to  obedience,  her  weakness  began. 

The  course  of  thought  is  simple :  The  duty  of  obedience  to  rulers  and  its  motive  in 
the  divine  appointment  (vers.  1,  2) ;  another  motive,  fi-cm  the  salutary  design  of  gov- 
ernment (vers.  3,  4)  ;  the  two  thoughts  combined  (ver.  5),  and  the  principle  illustrated 
from  the  universal  paying  of  taxes  (ver.  6),  then  applied  in  a  detailed  exhortation 
(ver.  7). 

Ver.  1.  Let  every  soul ;  every  human  being,  hut  with  refer- 
ence to  the  life  of  the  '  soul,'  rather  than  of  the  •  spirit,'  the  former 
being  the  common  life  of  the  subject  of  a  state. — Be  in  subjection, 
or,  '  submit  himself.'  The  latter  rendering  suggests  that  the  obedi- 
ence is  of  a  voluntary  and  rational  charactei",  noi  a  servile  and  blind 
subjection.  To  the  higher  powers,  or,  '  the  authorities  which  are 
over  him.'  '  Authorities  '  is  a  more  exact  rendering  and  accords  bet- 
ter with  the  use  of  the  singular  in  the  next  clause.  Political  rulers 
are  undoubtedly  meant,  and  most  probably  all  such,  of  every  rank  ; 
the  exclusive  reference  to  the  higher  class  of  rulers  being  very  doubt- 


212  ROMANS  XIII.  [13:  2. 

2  that  be  are  ordained  of  God.  Therefore  he  that  re- 
sisteth  the  power,  withstandeth  the  ordinance  of  God  : 
and  they  that  withstand  shall   receive  to  themselves 

ful. — For  there  is  no  power  (or,  '  authority,'  of  any  kind,  the  pro- 
position being  universal)  but  of  God.  The  preposi'ien,  according 
to  the  received  reading  is  more  exactly  '  from  ; '  according  to  the  bet- 
ter established  text.  '  by.'  The  former  indicates  that  there- is  no  au- 
thority apart  from  Him  as  the  source  ;  the  latter,  that  authority  is  es- 
tablished by  Him.  This  general  proposition  is  applied  in  the  next 
clause,  which  gives  the  motive  for  obedience  to  the  preceding  exhor- 
tation.— The  powers  that  be  ;  or,  '  they  that  exist.'  The  word 
'powers'  is  not  found  in  the  best  manuscripts  aud  is  rejected  by 
modern  editors.  The  reference  here  is  to  existing  civil  authorities, 
de  facto  governments,  which  the  Apostle  asserts,  are  ordained  of 
God.  The  simple,  pellucid  meaning  of  the  Apostle,  is  that  civil  gov- 
ernment is  necessary,  and  of  Divine  appointment.  We  infer  that  a.n- 
archy  is  as  godless  as  it  is  inhuman  ;  magistrates  derive  their  author- 
ity from  God,  even  when  chosen  by  the  people.  This  principle,  more- 
over, respects  the  office,  not  the  character  of  the  ruler.  But  as  the 
obedience  is  demanded  because  of  God's  appointment,  there  inheres 
this  limitation,  that  obedience  is  not  demanded  in  matters  contrary  to 
God's  appointment.  When  the  civil  power  is  most  directly  under  the 
control  of  <he  popular  will,  the  personal  responsibility  of  Christian 
citizens  is  greatest :  to  the  duty  of  obedience  are  added  those  of  politi- 
cal knowledge  and  prudence.  Unfortunately  these  '  rights  '  are  too  fre- 
quently recognized  more  clearly  than  the  duties  ;  and  history  proves 
plainly  enough  that  popular  government,  tvhen,  and  only  token  the  peo- 
ple are  permeated  by  Christian  principle,  contains  in  itself  the  preventive 
of  revolutionary  excess. 

Ver.  2.  Therefore  (as  a  result  of  the  principle  just  stated)  he 
that  resisteth  (or,  'setteth  himself  against')  the  power,  that 
particular  existing  authority,  to  which  he  should  submit  himself. 
(There  is  a  play  upon  the  words  in  the  Greek  which  cannot  be  repro- 
duced in  Fnglish). — Withstandeth,  or,  '  opposeth  ; '  not  the  same 
word  as  before,  though  the  A.  V.  renders  both  *  resisteth.' — The 
ordinance  of  God.  The  word  'ordinance'  corresponds  with  'or- 
dained' (ver.  1). — They  that  w^ithstand  shall  receive  to  them- 
selves judgement,  or,  '  condemnation.'  The  former  is  more 
literal,  but  the  latter  sense  is  evidently  implied.  '  Damnation  '  is 
incorrect,  since  it  suggests  future  eternal  punishment,  which  is  not 
meant  here.  But  the  'judgment'  is  from  God,  since  it  is  His 
'  ordinance '  which  is  withstood.  That  the  rulers  are  instruments  in 
inflicting  the  Divine  punishment  is  indicated  in  vers.  3;  4,  but  the  pun- 
ishment may  come  in  other  ways.  '  Paul  reproduces  here  in  a  cer- 
tain sense,  but  in  another  form,  the  saying  of  Jesus  (Matt.  26;  52) : 
"  All  they  that  take  the  sword  shall  perish  with  the  sword."  ' 
(Godet.) 


13:3,4.]  ROMANS  XIII.  213 

3  judgement.  For  rulers  are  not  a  terror  to  the  good 
work,  but  to  the  evil.  And  wouldest  thou  have  no 
fear  of  the  power  ?  do  that  which  is  good,  and  thcu 

4  shalt  have  j^raise  from  the  same :  for  ^he  is  a  minister 
of  God  to  thee  for  good.  But  if  thou  do  that  which 
is  evil,  be  afraid ;  for  ^  he  beareth  not  the  sword  in 

1  Or,  it 

Ver.  3.  For  rulers  (lit.,  'the  rulers,'  as  a  class),  etc.  Some  connect 
this  with  ver.  1,  as  an  additional  reason  for  obedience,  namely,  the 
salutary  design  of  government ;  others  find  here  the  ground  for  the 
last  clause  of  ver.  2.  The  former  accords  better  with  the  fuller  state- 
ments of  vers.  3,  4. — Not  a  terror  to  the  good  work,  etc.  '  The 
good  work'  and  'the  evil'  are  personified.  '  Beyond  the  work,  and  to 
the  intention^  the  prerogative  of  the  magistrate  does  not  extend' 
(Meyer).  If  this  verse  gives  a  reason  for  the  last  clause  of  ver.  2,  then 
'good  work'  and  'evil'  must  be  limited  to  obedience  and  resistance; 
which  seems  objectionable. — And  wouldest  thou,  etc.  The  clause 
may  be  taken  as  hypothetical:  'Thou  dost  not  wish,'  etc. — Thou 
shalt  have  praise  from  the  same.  In  thus  presenting  an  ideal 
of  civil  government,  the  Apostle  gives  the  reason  for  obedience  to 
rightful  authority,  and  establishes  a  principle  of  general  validity.  But 
the  ideal  itself  suggests  that  when  rulers  become  a  terror  to  the  good 
work,  another  maxim  can  have  place,  that  of  the  Apostles  (Acts  5  :  29) : 
'  We  must  obey  God  rather  than  man.'  Nero  had  not  yet  shown  his 
true  character,  when  this  Epistle  was  written.  Even  he  persecuted 
the  Christians  as  alleged  evil-doers. 

Yer.  4.  For  he  is  a  minister  of  God  to  thee  for  good.  This 
is  a  purpose  for  which  civil  governmeut  was  ordaincil  (  ^'  Gud  (the  word 
'  God'  is  in  emphatic  position).  By  the  fulfilment  of  this  purpose  the 
relative  excellence  of  forms  of  government  may  be  determined.  It  is 
an  empirical  test,  and  does  not  assume  that  there  is  ^jure  divino  form. 
The  verse  presents  a  confirmation  of  ver.  3  :  '  Dost  thou  then  wish,' 
etc. — Be  afraid ;  for  he  beareth  not  the  sword  in  vain.  •  Bear- 
eth '  habitually  '  the  sword  ; '  is  not  the  dagger  of  the  emperor  and  his 
prefect,  but  the  curved  sword  of  the  provincial  Roman  magistrates, 
which  moreover  was  borne  before  them  in  public  processions  as  a  sym- 
bol of  their  right  to  punish  with  death. — An  avenger  for  wrath, 
etc.  The  magistrate  is  God's  minister,  not  only  for  good,  but  in  this 
respect  also  ;  ho  is  'an  avenger  for  wrath,'  it  is  his  office  to  punish 
evil,  to  vindicate  those  who  have  been  wronged  (comp.  Luke  18  :  3-8), 
for  the  execution  of  the  Divine  wrath,  which  is  here  named  to 
strengthen  the  force  of  the  argument.  The  theory  of  civil  penalty 
here  involved  includes  more  than  eflForts  to  restrain  and  reform  the 
criminal.  The  Apostle  undoubtedly  here  asserts  the  right  of  capital 
punishment.  He  is  describing  an  ideal  of  civil  government,  and  this 
right  has  been  and  will  be  abused,  to  the  extent  that  the  State  falls 


214  ROMANS  XIII.  [13:5,6. 

vain:  for  4ie  is  a  minister  of  God,  an  avenger  for 

5  wrath  to  him  that  cloeth  evil.     Wherefore  ye  must 
needs  be  in  subjection,  not  only  because  of  the  wrath, 

6  but  also  for  conscience  sake.     For  for  this  cause'ye 
pay  tribute  also ;  for  they  are  ministers  of  God's  ser- 

1  Or,  it 

below  this  ideal.  But  the  right  remains  ;  fully  justified  by  the  theory 
of  punishment  here  advanced,  and  by  the  necessities  of  self- preserva- 
tion on  the  part  of  society  represented  by  the  punishing  power.  More- 
over, the  right  to  punish  also  implies  the  right  to  pardon  ;  and  the 
measure  of  the  right  [i.  e.,  the  conformity  to  the  ideal  here  presented) 
will  be  also  the  measure  of  the  sense  of  responsibility,  both  as  to  the 
punishing  and  pardoning  power.  The  usual  objections  to  capital  pun- 
ishment misapprehend,  both  the  nature  of  punishment  in  general,  and 
ihe  Divine  authority  in  civil  government. 

Ver.  5.  Wherefore  ye  must  needs,  etc.  In  accordance  with 
■what  has  been  stated  ('wherefore'),  the  necessity  of  obedience  rests, 
not  only  on  grounds  of  prudence,  because  of  the  wrath,  but  on. 
moral  grounds,  but  also  for  consciencs'  sake  ;  obedience  is  a 
religious  duty. 

Ver.  6.  For  for  this  cause  ye  pay  tribute  also.  This  clause 
is  indicative,  not  imperative  (^though  the  form  in  the  Greek  admits  of 
either  sense).  The  fact  of  tribute-p.iyhig  was  universal,  and  'for' 
seems  to  introduce  a  reason  for  this  fact,  rather  than  a  motive  for  an 
exhortation.  The  connection  is  more  doubtful.  Some  join  '  for  this 
cause  also'  with  vers.  1-4,  making  this  ve  se  parallel  with  ver.  5,  as 
the  statement  of  another  result  of  tlie  Divine  appointment.  Others, 
with  more  propriety,  connect  it  immediately  with  ver.  5,  finding  here 
a  result  of  the  necessity  there  stated,  as  well  as  a  confirmation  of  it. 
But,  as  that  verse  is  an  inference  from  what  precedes,  this  view  implies 
a  reference  to  the  entire  discussion.  '  For'  introduces  the  fact  of  pay- 
ing tribute  as  a  proof  that  obedience  is  due  for  the  reasons  assigned  ia 
ver.  5.  'Also,'  suggests  the  correspondence  with  other  acts  of  obedi- 
ence. '  As  a  proof  that  it  is  necessary  to  obey  for  these  two  reasons 
(ver.  5),  I  adduce  from  among  the  duties  prompted  by  these  reasons 
("for  this  cause")  one  ("also")  universally  performed,  namely,  the 
paying  of  tribute.' — For  they  (/.  e.,  the  magistrates)  are  the  min- 
isters of  God's  service,  'the  emphasis  rests  on  the  word  rendered 
'  ministers,'  which  is  a  Sironger  one  than  that  used  in  ver.  4.  It  be- 
longs to  a  class  of  words  applied  to  the  temple  service  of  the  Jewish 
priests.  Our  word  'liturgy'  is  derived' from  the  same  term.  'Ac- 
cordingly, those  who  rule,  in  so  far  as  they  serve  the  divine  counsel 
and  will,  and  employ  their  strength  and  activity  to  this  end,  are  to  be 
regarded  as  persons  whose  administration  has  the  character  of  a 
divinely  consecrated  socrificinl  service,  a  prirstlt/  nature'  (Meyer). — 
Attending  continually  upon  (lit.,  'for')  this  very  thing.    Go- 


13:  7.]  ROMANS  XIII.  215 

vice,    attending    continually   upon    this   veiy   thing. 
7  Render  to  all  their  dues  :  tribute  to  whom  tribute  is 
due;  custom  to  whom  custom;  fear  to  whom  fear; 
honour  to  whom  honour. 

(let  joins  'fur  this  very  thing'  with  the  preceding  clause,  but  this 
seems  forced.  'This  very  thing'  may  refer,  either  to  the  payment  of 
taxes,  or  to  the  entire  '  ministry '  of  the  magistrates.  The  wider 
thought  of  ver.  7  favors  the  latter  view,  which  is  preferable  for  the 
further  reason  that  the  participle,  '  attending  continuallv,'  suggests  a 
moral  idea.  '  You  pay  taxes  because  they  are  necessary  to  maintain 
rulers,  and  it  is  necessary  to  maintain  rulers  because  of  the  nature  of 
the  office,  as  ministering  servants  of  God,  whose  constant  duty  it  is  to  be 
a  terror  to  evil-doers  and  a  praise  to  those  who  do  what  is  beneficial.' 

Ver.  7.  Render  to  all  their  dues.  The  weight  of  evidence  is 
against  the  word  'therefore,'  which  would  readily  be  inserted,  since 
we  have  here  an  inferential  exhortation.  Some  connect  this  verse 
with  the  next  section,  in  view  of  its  general  statements ;  but  it  is  a 
summing  up  of  what  precedes,  and  at  the  same  time  a  transition  to  the 
more  general  admonitions  which  follow.  'All,'  in  this  view,  refers  to 
all  kinds  of  rulers,  though  the  principle  is  applied  in  the  next  section 
to  all  persons.— Tribute:  etc.  'Is  due'  is  properly  supplied  in  Eng- 
lish, the  Greek  construction  being  elliptical.  'Tribute'  is  a  direct  tax 
on  person  or  property. —  Custom  is  a  toll,  or  duty,  on  goods. — 
Fear  ....  honour.  If  the  reference  is  to  rulers,  the  former  is  to 
be  applied  to  the  proper  sentiment  and  conduct  toward  the  higher 
magistrates,  especially  judges,  the, latter  to  magistrates  in  general. 
Alford  applies  honor  '  to  all  on  whom  the  State  has  conferred  distinc- 
tion.' If  the  wider  reference  is  accepted,  'fear'  means  the  reverence 
paid  to  superiors ;  honor,  the  courtesy  due  to  equals.  This  is  a  fair 
inference,  but  the  more  limited  application  seems  preferable.  As  re- 
gai'ds  the  present  application  of  the  section,  a  variety  of  opinion  ob- 
tains. Views  :  (1.)  That  the  Apostle's  exhortation  has  no  application 
to  our  time,  when  Christianity  is  the  governing  principle  of  the  civil- 
ized world.  Here  the  premise  is  only  partially  true,  and  the  conclu- 
sion not  warranted  by  the  premise,  if  true.  (2.)  That  passive 
obedience  to  civil  power  is  the  invariable  rule  for  Christians.  This  is 
a  mechanical  conception  of  the  Apostle's  position,  and  opposed  by  con- 
siderations drawn  from  the  New  Testament  itself.  Moreover,  where 
any  branch  of  the  government  represents  the  people,  the  duty  of 
opposing  the  rulers  by  constitutional  means  is  a  virtual  denial  of  the 
theory  of  non-resistance.  (3.)  The  correct  view  seems  to  be  that  the 
principles  here  laid  down  are  of  universal  application,  but  that  such 
application  has  of  necessity  its  limitations  and  variations.  The  ideal 
of  civil  government  here  presented  affords  on  the  one  hand  abundant 
reason  for  obedience  to  rightful  authority,  and  yet  on  the  other  makes 
room  for  Christian  resistance  to  rulers  who  utterly  and  entirely  depart 


216  ROMANS  XIII.  [13:  S. 

Chapter  13:  8-14. 

General  Exhortation  to  Love,  and  to  a  Christian  Walk. 

8     Owe  no  man  any  thing,  save  to  love  one  another :  for 
he  that  loveth  ^  his  neighboul'  hath  f allilled  ^  the  law. 

1  Gr.  the  other.  2  Or,  law. 

from  this  ideal.  But  tlie  Christian's  duty  is  to  obey,  until  the  duty  of 
resistance  is  clearly  proven.  Such  obedience  has  led  to  civil  freedom, 
and  consists  with  the  highest  spiritual  freedom.  When  rendered  on 
the  principle  here  laid  down,  it  continually  asserts  that  the  higher  law 
is  the  basis  of  the  lower  authority,  and  thus  tends  to  elevate  the  State 
toward  the  Apostolic  ideal.  This  ideal  of  the  Apostle  neither  con- 
founds Church  and  State,  nor  places  them  in  antagonism,  but  properly 
coordinates  them  in  Christian  ethics.  Romanism  subordinates  the 
State  to  the  Church,  usually  placing  them  in  antagonism,  Erastianism 
subordinates  the  Church  to  the  State,  usually  confounding  them.  Pu- 
ritanism also  confounded  them,  but  with  more  of  acknowledged  theo- 
cratic principle.  Godet  well  says  :  'The  essence  and  origin  of  the  two 
societies  are  different,  their  administration  should  remain  distinct.' 

4.    General  Exhortation  to  Love,  and  to  a   Christian    Walk,  vers.  8-14. 

The  more  general  exhortation  of  ver.  8  seems  to  have  been  suggested  by  the  thought 
of  obligation  which  underlies  ver.  7:  fulfil  all  obligations;  but  the  universal  one, 
M  hich  can  never  be  fully  discharged,  is  that  of  love  to  one  another.  The  ground  of 
this  obligation,  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  law,  is  then  discussed  (vers.  9,  10)  A  motive 
is  introduced,  drawn  from  the  approacliing  day  of  the  Lord  (vers.  11,  12  a  ,  which 
is  made  the  basis  of  further  exhortations  to  a  corresponding  Christian  walk 
(vers.  12  b-14). 

Ver.  8.  Owe  no  man  any  thing.  On  the  connection  of  thought, 
see  above.  The  clause  is  undoubtedly  imperative,  and  the  meaning  is 
very  wide,  including  to  all  possible  obligations  to  every  human  being, 
and  not  to  be  liraiteil  to  a  caution  against  pecuniary  indebtedness. — 
Save  to  love  one  another.  This  is  an  exception  which  is  not  an 
exception.  'Owe'  in  the  first  clause  refers  to  external  obligations,  but 
from  the  nature  of  the  case  the  obligation  referred  to  in  the  second 
clause  is  a  moral  one,  the  apprehension  of  which  will  grow  with  exer- 
cise. The  more  we  love,  the  more  we  will  feel  the  claims  of  love.  This 
obligation  can  never  be  paid  ;  hence  here  we  must  '  owe,'  but  we  must 
here  most  faithfully  attempt  to  discharge  our  obligations. — For  he 
that  loveth.  This  clause  shows  that  the  previous  one  was  a  com- 
mand to  love,  irrespective  of  our  inability  to  discharge  the  growing 
sense  of  obligation. — His  neighbour,  lit.,  'the  other,'  the  other  one 
who  is  loved," in  the  given  case.—  Hath  fulfilled  the  law.  'In  and 
with  the  loving  there  has  taken  place  what  the  Mosaic  law  prescribes, 
namely,  in  respect  of  duties  toward  one's  neighbor '  (Meyer).     Love  is 


13:  9-11.]  ROMANS  XIII.  217 

9  For  this,  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery,  Thou  shalt 
not  kill,  Thou  shalt  not  steal,  Thou  shalt  not  covet, 
and  if  there  be  any  other  commandment,  it  is  summed 
up  in  this  word,  namely.  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neigh- 

lu  hour  as  thyself.  Love  worketh  no  ill  to  his  neigh- 
bour: love  therefore  is  the  fulfilment  of  ^the  law. 

11  And  this,  knowing  the  season,  that  now  it  is  high 
time  for  you  to  awake  out  of  sleep:  for  now  is  ^salva- 

1  Or,  law.  2  Or,  our  salvation  nearer  than  when  dtc. 

more  than  a  performance  of  the  single  precepts  of  the  law,  it  is  the 
essence  of  the  law  itself.  '  Nor  is  it  possible  to  find  for  human  life, 
amid  all  the  intricate  mazes  of  conduct,  any  other  principle  that  should 
be  at  once  as  simple,  as  powerful,  and  as  profound'  (Sanday).  The 
context  (vers.  9,  10)  plainly  shows  that  the  Mosaic  law  is  meant,  while 
the  whole  Epistle  excludes  any  idea  of  justification  as  based  on  this 
fulfilment.  The  Apostle  is  writing  to  those  who  love,  because  they  are 
justified. 

Ver.  9.  For  this,  etc.  Four  out  of  the  five  commandments  in  the 
second  table  of  the  law  are  cited.  Tbe  received  text  inserts  the  ninth 
commandment  also,  but  on  insufficient  authority.  The  seventh  com- 
mandment here  precedes  the  sixth,  as  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament 
(Mark  10:  19,  received  text;  Luke  18:  20;  Jas.  2:  11).  The  same 
order  occurs  in  some  MSS.  of  the  LXX ;  and  Paul  may  have  followed 
these.  The  tenth  commandment  is  given  in  brief  form.  It  forbids  the 
most  frequent  cause  of  a  violation  of  the  rights  of  others.  Only  the 
second  table  is  recalled,  because  duties  to  our  neighbor  are  under  dis- 
cussion.— If  there  be,  etc.  This  includes  the  omitted  commandment, 
whether  Paul  had  this  in  mind  or  not. — Summed  up.  The  Greek 
word  answers  exactly  to  our  word  'recapitulate,'  to  bring  togethei* 
again  under  one  head.  Comp.  Eph.  1 :  10. — This  word  ;  a  term  ap- 
plied to  the  commandments.  — Thou  shalt  love,  etc.  The  command- 
ments were  more  than  prohibitory,  as  this  recapitulation  by  Moses 
plainly  showed;  see  marginal  references  also. 

Ver.  10.  Love  vrorketh  no  ill  to  his  neighbour,  lit,  'the 
neighbor.'  Alford :  'AH  the  commandments  of  the  law  above  cited 
Sive  negative:  the  formal  fulfilment  of  them  is  therefore  attained,  by 
working  no  ill  to  one's  neighbor.  What  greater  things  love  works  he 
does  not  now  say.'  Paul's  further  comments  on  this  thought  may  be 
found  in  1  Cor.  13:  4-7  (Meyer). — Love  therefore  is  the  fulfil- 
ment of  the  law.  A  repetition  of  the  proposition  in  ver.  8,  after  its 
truth  has  been  demonstrated  (vers.  9,  10).  'Fulfilment'  is  a  more 
accurate  rendering  than  'fulfilling'  (A.  V.). 

Ver.  11.  And  this.  It  is  not  necessary  to  supply  anything;  the 
sense  is:  and  ye  should  the  rather  do  this,  i.  e.,  'love  one  another' 
(ver.  8),  as  afterwards  expanded. — Knowing  the  season  ;  since  ye 


218  ROMANS  XIII.  [13:  12. 

12  tioii  nearer  to  us  than  when  we  first  believed.  The 
night  is  far  spent,  and  the  day  is  at  hand  :  let  us  there- 
fore cast  off  the  works  of  darkness,  and  let  us  jiut  on 

know  the  season.  What  this  means  is  then  explained  :  that  no^w  it 
is  time,  etc.— For  you.  The  received  text  has  'us,'  which  does  not 
appear  in  the  A.  V.,  but  the  oldest  authorities  support  'you,'  which  is 
the  subject  of  the  following  infinitive. — To  awake  out  of  sleep  ;  it 
is  already  time  that  you  should  awake  out  of  sleep.  Meyer  joins  '  al- 
ready'  with  the  infinitive  clause,  which  seems  unnecessary.  Sinc3  this 
exhortation  is  addressed  to  Christians,  '  sleep'  must  be  taken  in  a  rela- 
tive sense,  and  explained  of  '  the  state  of  worldly  carelessness  and  in- 
difference to  sin,  which  allows  and  pi-actices  the  ivorks  of  darkness.  The 
imagery  seems  to  be  taken  originally  from  our  Lord's  discourse  con- 
cerning His  coming:  see  Matt.  24:  42;  Mark  13:  33,  and  Luke  21 : 
28-38,  where  several  points  of  similarity  to  our  vei-s.  11-14  occur' 
(Alford). — For  now  (not  the  same  word  as  before)  is  salvation 
nearer  to  us  (or,  'is  our  salvation  nearer')  than  when  w^e  first 
believed.  This  is  the  motive  for  the  preceding  exhortation.  Of  the 
renderings  we  give,  the  former  is  favored  by  the  order  of  words  in  the 
original.  'First  believed'  is  a  correct  paraphrase,  indicating  tlie 
single  act  of  faith  with  which  the  Christian  life  began.  '  Salvation'  is 
regarded  by  most  of  the  recent  commentators  as  referring  to  the  se- 
cond coming  of  Christ.  Others  object  to  this  view  on  the  ground  that 
it  implies  a  mistaken  expectation  on  the  part  of  the  Apostle,  as  well  as 
because  either  the  word  'coming,'  or,  'appearing.'  would  be  used,  if 
that  were  the  sense.  The  latter  objection  is  not  of  much  weight,  since 
tha  word  'salvation'  often  has  a  future  reference,  and  in  the  Apostle's 
mind  the  blessedness  of  the  future  was  intimately  associated  with  the 
coming  of  the  Lord.  Further,  even  if  Paul  had  a  personal  hope  that 
the  Lord  would  soon  return,  that  did  net  interfere  with  his  so  writing 
that  his  teaching  corrected  the  errors  of  others,  because  it  was  itself 
inspired.  He  himself  knew  that  he  could  knoio  the  time;  and  therefore 
he  could  not,  and  did  not,  teach  any  error  on  this  point.  Indeed,  the 
very  statements  which  are  used  to  prove  that  he  had  this  expectation 
prove  even  more  clearly  their  own  adaDtation  to  the  needs  of  the  wait- 
ing Church.  They  have  been  literally  true  in  their  application  to 
Christians  for  centuries.  On  this  great  subject  the  Apostle  taught  the 
truth,  as  well  as  rebuked  error.  But  Stuart,  Hodge,  and  others,  main- 
tain quite  strongly  the  exclusive  reference  to  the  deliverance  from 
present  evil,  the  consummation  of  salvation  for  the  individual  believer 
in  eternity.  Undoubtedly  we  must  accept  such  an  application  and 
press  it  as  a  motive,  but  the  other  view  seems  to  be  the  correct  one. 

Ver.  12.  The  night  is  far  spent,  etc.  The  figure  here  must  be 
interpreted  in  accordance  with  the  view  taken  of  '  salvation'  (ver.  11). 
•The  night'  is  primarily  the  period  up  to  the  Advent,  the  approach  of 
which  is  indicated  :  the  day  is  at  hand.  Of  course  there  are  otlier 
applications ;  '  the  day  will  break  a  hundred  times,  in  e\  er  greater 


13:13,14.]  ROMANS  Xlir.  219 

13  the  armour  of  light.  Let  us  walk  honestly,  as  in  the 
day;  not  in  revelling  and  drunkenness,  not  in  chamber- 

14  ing  and  wantonness,  not  in  strife  and  jealousy.  But 
put  ye  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  make  not  pro- 
vision for  the  flesh,  to  fulfil  the  lusts  thereof. 

potencies,  between  the  first  and  the  second  coming  of  Christ'  (Lange). 
But  it  is  fanciful  to  refer  'the  night'  to  the  spiritual  condition  of  hea- 
then Rome,  and  'the  day'  to  Christian  Rome. — Let  us  therefore 
cast  oft,  as  one  casts  off  his  clothing,  the  -works  of  darkness, 
works  done  in  darkness,  as  their  characteristic  moral  element;  comp. 
Eph.  5:  11. — Let  us  put  on  the  armour  of  light.  Spiritual  light 
is  the  possession  of  the  believer;  he  is  exhorted  to  put  on  the  armor 
which  properly  belongs  thereto.  His  clothing  is  not  for  luxury,  or 
show,  but  for  a  conflict  (comp.  Eph.  6:  13).  The  'armor'  represents 
principles,  modes  of  action,  rather  than  the  resulting  good  deeds. 

Ver.  13.  Let  us  walk  honestly  (or,  'seemly'),  as  in  the  day. 
Both  'honestly'  (A.  V.)  and  'decently'  (A.  V.  margin)  are  too  limited, 
the  reference  being  to  decorum,  such  as  befits  the  day  when  conduct  is 
open  to  observation. — Not  in  revelling  and  drunkenness.  The 
former  refers  to  nocturnal  revels,  and  was  probably  suggested  by  the 
figures  of  'night'  and  'day;'  tbe  latter  means  drunken  carousals  ;  both 
are  plural  in  the  original. — Not  in  chambering  and  -wanton- 
ness. Various  forms  of  secret  vice  are  here  indicated  liy  the  plural. 
These  sins  are -closely  connected  with  the  preceding,  often  caused  by 
them.  In  Gal.  5:  19;  Eph.  4:  19  and  elsewhere,  the  word  rendered 
'wantonness'  occurs,  but  is  rendered  'lasciviousness.'  It  points  to  an 
abandoned  sensuality. — Not  in  strife  and  jealousy.  These  follow 
in  the  train  of  sensuality,  as  Roman  life  was  then  testifying  most 
sadly.  ('Envying'  is  inexact.)  The  entire  family  of  vices  is  well- 
known,  and  the  relationship  obvious.  '  It  is  interesting  to  know  that 
this  verse,  happening  to  catch  the  eye  of  St.  Augustine,  had  a  great 
effect  in  leading  to  his  baptism  and  change  of  life'  (Sanday). 

Ver.  14.  But  put  ye  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  In  Gal.  3 : 
27  the  putting  on  of  Christ  is  represented  as  a  finished  fact  (in  prin- 
ciple), but  here  the  exhortation  is  to  a  continuous  duty.  In  both  cases 
vital  fellow.?hip  is  meant,  but  each  step  in  the  growing  conformity  to 
Christ  is  a  new  putting  on  of  Him,  so  that  we  present  Him,  not  our- 
selves, in  our  conduct. —And  make  not  provision  for  the  flesh, 
etc.  There  are  two  views  of  this  passage.  (1.)  '  Flesh  '  is  taken  in  the 
strictly  ethical  sense  ;  the  meaning  will  then  be:  make  no  provision 
whatever  for  the  flesh  (the  depraved  natui-e),  so  as  to  fulfil  its  lusts, 
and  also  because  such  provision  would  fulfil  them.  In  favor  of  this 
maybe  urged,  the  emphatic  position  of  'flesh'  in  the  original;  its 
usual  sense  in  this  Epistle,  and  the  contrast  with  putting  on  Christ 
Jesus.  (2.)  Flesh  is  understood  in  its  physiological  sense,  the  mate- 
rial of  the  body,  which  is  the  source  and  seat  of  sensual  desires.   Tho 


220  ROMANS  XIV.  [1*:  1- 

Chapter  14:  1-12. 

Fraternal  Duty  in  the  Case  of  the  Weak  Brethren. 

1      But  him  that  is  weak  in  faith  receive  ye,  yet  not  ^  to 

1  Or, /or  decisions  of  doubts. 

sense  then  is,  make  sucli  provision  for  the  flesh,  as  shall  not  fulfil  its 
lusts.  The  position  of  the  word  •  not '  in  the  original  favors  this  view, 
but  it  is  otherwise  open  to  grave  objections  (comp.  Weiss  against 
Meyer). 

Chapteks  14:  1—15:  13. 

II.     Special    Discussion    Respecting    the    Scruples    of     certain 
Weak  Brethren. 

This  part  of  the  Epistle  was  occasionerl  by  the  existence  at  Rome  of  a  class  of  Chris- 
tians who  had  scruples  in  regard  to  eating  meat  and  drinking  wine,  and  who  clung  to 
the  observance  of  the  Jewish  festivals.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  origin  of  such 
a  class  see  below),  the  result  was  that  tln-so  judged  their  less  scrupulous  Christian 
brethren,  wiio  in  return  looked  upon  them  with  contempt.  The  Apostles  exhorta- 
tion, while  ad  Iressed  mainly  to  the  stronger  brethren,  who  constituted,  the  great  ma^ 
jority  of  the  Church,  lays  down  a  principle  of  universal  validity  in  regard  to  differ- 
ences of  opinion  ;irnong  Christians  on  practical  points  not  inconsistent  with  common 
faith  in  Christ,  and  hence  not  essential  to  -alvation.  The  passage  may  be,  for  conve- 
nience, divided  into  three  sections  :  (1.)  Exhortation  to  reciprocal  forbearance  and 
regard,  mainly  addressed  to  the  weak;  chap.  14  :  1-12;  (2.)  Proper  use  of  Christian 
liberty,  on  the  part  of  the  stronger  brethren;  ohap.  14:  13-23.  (3.)  More  general 
treatment  of  the  subject,  passing  over  into  expression  of  Christian  praise;  chap.  15: 
1-13.  The  entire  pa-sage  is  'at  the  same  time  the  first  step  in  the  return  from  the 
form  of  a  treatise  to  that  of  a  let.'er ;  it  forms,  in  consequence,  the  transition  to  the 
epistolary  conclusion  of  the  entire  writing'  (Godet).  This  is  important  in  its  bearing 
upon  the  question  respecting  tlie  place  of  chaps.  15, 16  in  the  Epistle. 

The  Weak  Brethren  at  Rome.  The  scruples  of  the  weak  brethren  were  respect- 
ing eating  flesh,  drinking  wine  and  the  non-observance  of  the  Jewish  festivals.  The 
result  of  these  scruples,  as  indicated  bv  the  Apostle's  exhortation,  gives  no  certain 
clue  to  their  origin.  But  the  tone  of  the  exhortation  shows  that  Paul  did  not  regard 
these  brethren  in  the  same  light  as  he  did  the  Judaijing  teachers  in  Galatia,  the 
errorists  in  Colossi,  or  even  the  weak  brethren  at  Corinth  (1  Cor.  8  and  10).  He 
speaks  of  and  to  them  in  a  mild  and  persuasive  way  entirely  different  from  his  language 
against  false  teachers.  AVe  must  therefore  consider  them  as  men  with  weak  ascetic 
prejudices,  rather  than  as  legalist*,  or  antipauline  Judaizers.  The  persons  referred  to 
in  1  (or.  seem  most  closely  allied  in  opinion  to  these,  but  at  Rome  the  scruple  does 
not  appear  to  have  been  confined  to  meat  offered  to  idols  They  were  not  Jewish 
Christians  who  wi.-^hed  to  retain  the  law,  but  it  is  probable  that  they  were  mainly  of 
Jewish  origin.  Scrupulousness  abQut  meat  offered,  and  wine  poured  out,  to  idols,  may 
have  led  to  entire  abstinence  from  'neat  and  wine,  or  even  from  all  food  which  in 
their  view  others  might  have  rendered  unclean  in  their  preparation  of  it.    Possibly 


14:  2.]  ROMANS  XIV.  221 

2  doubtful  disputations.     One  man  liath  faith  to  eat  all 

this  asceticism  was  fine  to  Essenic  influences ;  but  it  could  scarcely  have  been  deriTed 
from  the  schools  of  heathen  philosophy.  Godet  discovers  an  attempt  to  return  to  the 
vegetarian  rule  of  the  antediluvian  age.  The  entire  discussion  show^  profound  in- 
sight respecting  human  character,  and  the  adaptation  of  the  principles  laid  down  to 
social  Christian  life  in  all  ages  has  been  again  and  again  proven.  Unfortunately  ec- 
clesiastical bodies  have  too  often  made  deliverances  on  matters  of  minor  morals  which 
overpass  the  limits  here  set  to  bearing  the  infirmities  of  the  weak.  The  aitempt  to 
make  men  holy  by  ecclesiastical  law  has  always  failed  ;  no  other  result  is  possible, 
since  .he  law  of  3Ioses  proved  powerless  to  sanctify. 

1.  Fraternal  Duty  in  the  Case  of  the  Weak  Brethren,  vers.  1-12. 

The  exhortation  to  receive  the  weak  (ver.  1) ;  the  difference  between  the  strong  and 
the  weak  in  the  matter  of  eating  (ver.  2),  with  admonitions  to  these  classes  respectively 
(ver.  3),  especially  to  the  weik  brother,  who  judges  ;  ver.  4) ;  the  difference  respecting 
the  observance  of  days  (ver.  5) :  the  Christian  attitude  of  both  classes  in  their  different 
conduct  (ver.  6),  based  upon  the  common  relation  to  Christ  our  Ruler  (vers.  7-9) ;  a 
warning  to  both  classes  in  view  of  the  accountability  to  God  as  a  Judge  (vers.  10-12X 

The  caution  about  judging  is  prophetic  :  more  divisions  and  discords  have  arisen  in 
the  Church  from  the  questions  here  leferred  to,  about  which  the  Apostle  has  given  no 
authoritative  decision,  than  from  the  d  scussion  of  the  truly  weighty  matters  of  the 
previous  chapters,  in  regard  to  which  he  speaks  so  positively.  Neglect  of  distinct- 
ively Christian  truth  is  often  joined  with  pettiness  in  Christian  ethics. 

Ver.  1.  Him  that  is  weak  in  faith.  (See  note  above.)  The 
phrase  might  le  rendered  'in  his  fjiith,'  since  faith  in  Christ  is  meant, 
not  Christian  doctrine,  or,  moral  conviction,  or  knowledge.  The  lat- 
ter ideas  are  implied  ;  for  in  the  cases  referred  to  the  faith  did  not 
have  its  practical  result  in  moral  disernment  and  conviction  in  regard 
to  what  properly  belonged  to  a  life  of  faith. —  Receive  ye  ;  do  not 
reject  or  discourage  him,  but  count  him  one  of  your  number,  in  fra- 
ternal fellowship.  This  exhortation  suggests  that  the  weak  brethren 
were  in  a  small  minority. — Yet  not  to  doubtful  disputations, 
lit.,  '  unto  decisions  of  thoughts.'  This  clause  is  addressed  to  the 
stronger  brethren,  who  formed  the  great  majority  of  the  church. 
While  they  receive  the  weak  brother,  it  should  not  be  in  such  a  way 
as  to  produce  this  result,  that  his  thoughts  (in  this  case  the  scruples 
named  in  vers.  2,  5,  etc.)  are  criticised  and  judged.  To  refer  it  to 
both  parties  is  opppsed  by  the  form  of  the  sentence.  The  word 
'thoughts'  here  refers  to  doubts,  but  does  not  itself  mean  this.  Codet 
explains:  'debates  consisting  in  vain  reasonings.'  But  the  former 
word  means  decisions,  or  discriminations  of  judgment,  while 
'thoughts,'  though  usually  having  a  bad  sense  in  the  New  Testament, 
never  mean  vain  reasonings.  Lange's  view  :  '  not  to  the  judicial  de- 
cision of  motives,'  though  a  proper  inference,  is  lexically  indefensible. 

Ver.  2.  One  man  ;  as  in  ver.  5.  '  For '  is  not  found  in  the  ori- 
ginal.— Hath  faith  to  eat  all  things.  'Believeth'  is  literal,  but 
the  reference  to  'faith'  throughout  makes  this  paraphrase  necessary. 


222  ROMANS  XIV.  [14  :  3,  4. 

3  things  :  but  he  that  is  weak  eateth  herbs.  Let  not 
him  that  eateth  set  at  nought  him  that  eateth  not ;  and 
let  not  him  that  eateth  not  judge  him  that  eateth  :  for 

4  God  hath  received  him.  AVho  art  thou  that  judgest 
the  ^servant  of  another?  to  his  own  lord  he  standi th 

1  Gr.  hoiiseJwLl-scrvant. 

One  has  a  confidence  resulting  from  faith  which  permits  him  to  eat 
every  kind  of  food.  This  is  the  first  point  of  difi'erence,  and  the 
position  of  the  majority  naturally  conies  first. — But  he  that  is  weak 
eateth  herbs.  (See  above.)  This  is  best  taken  in  its  exact  sense  ;  the 
scruple  was  such  that  only  vegetables  were  eaten.  Even  bread,  prepared 
by  others,  may  have  been  deemed  unclean.  But  there  may  have  been 
a  vaiiety  of  usage  among  the  weak  brethren.  Such  believers  are  apt 
to  difier  among  tliemselves,  as  well  as  with  their  stronger  brethren. 

Ver.  3.  Let  not  him  that  eateth  set  at  nought  (as  in  ver.  10) 
him  that  eateth  not.  '  The  self-consciousness  of  strength  misleads 
into  looking  down  with  contempt  on  the  weak  '  (Meyer).  Against  this 
so  natural  tendency  the  Apostle  cautions  ;  in  the  lattei-  lialf  of  the 
chapter,  the  duty  of  the  strong  is  more  fully  explained. — Judge  him 
that  eateth.  The  weak  brother  fiiils  to  comprehend  the  liberty  of 
the  stronger  one  ;  his  misjudgment  leads  to  false  judgment,  namely,  in 
condemning  the  person  whose  conduct  he  fails  to  reconcile  to  the  scru- 
ples of  his  weak  faith.  The  reference  is  not  to  (/oc/7-???r//diflrerences,  but 
to  practical  Christian  ethics. — For  God  hath  received  him.  '  Did 
receive  him  '  is  more  literal,  pointing  to  the  time  when  fellowship 
in  Christ  began.  This  clause  gives  a  reason  for  not  judging  (comp. 
ver.  4),  though  some  would  refer  it  to  both  the  preceding  prohib- 
itions. But  it  is  far  more  pertinent  to  the  weak  brethren,  since 
they  are  apt  to  excommunicate,  withdraw  from  fellowship  on  trivial 
grounds  of  external  observance,  thus  rejecting  him  whom  God  re- 
ceived. The  strong  do  not  reject,  but,  while  tolerating,  are  prone  to 
despise  the  weak. 

Ver.  4.  Who  art  thou  that  judgest?  Comp.  chap  9  :  20.  Evi- 
dently addressed  to  the  weak  brother,  rather  than  to  both  classes. — The 
servant  of  another.  The  '  household  servant'  (see  marg.)  was  more 
closely  connected  with  the  family  than  the  other  slaves,  and  in  those 
times  often  the  recipient  of  great  and  special  favor&from  a  powerful  mas- 
ter.— To  his  o"wn  lord.  '  Lord  '  is  preferable  to  '  master,'  to  indicate 
the  correspondence  with  the  correct  reading  of  the  last  clause  of  the 
verse,  and  also  to  suggest  the  evident  reference  to  Christ. — He  stand- 
eth  or  falleth.  The  judgment  of  the  weak  would  exclude  the  >tronger 
brother  from  his  place  as  a  Chri-tian  (ver.  3),  hence  it  is  most  natural 
to  explain  this  phrase  of  the  continuance  or  non-continuance  in  the 
daily  fidelity  of  a  true  Christian  life.  To  refer  it  to  God's  final  judg- 
ment seems  less  in  accordence  with  the  context,  where  Christ's  poAver, 
n.  t  His  grace,  is  spoken  of.    The  passage  implies,  that  God  only  is  the 


U :  5,  6.]  ROMANS  XIV.  223 

or  falleth.     Yea,  he  shall   be  made  to  stand;  for  the 

5  Lord  hath  power  to  make  him  stand.  One  man  es- 
teemeth  one  day  above  another  :  another  esteemeth 
every  day  aliJ:e.    Let  each  man  be  fully  assured  in  his 

6  own  mind.  He  that  reoardeth  the  dav,  reg^ardeth  it  unto 
the  Lord  :  and  he  that  eateth,  eateth  unto  the  Lord,  for 
he  giveth  God  thanks ;  and  he  that  eateth  not,  unto  the 

Lord  of  the  conscience,  but  that  is  not  its  primary  meaning. — He 
shall  be  made  to  stand ;  for  the  Lord  ('  his  own  Lord,'  namely, 
Christ)  hath  po-wer  to  make  him  stand.  The  argument  is  still 
addressed  to  the  weak  brother,  who  condemns  the  stronger  one,  thinks 
he  must  fall,  if  he  exercises  such  freedom.  But  the  Apostle  asserts : 
the  standing  and  falling  concerns  Christ  who  is  his  master,  and  Christ 
who  is  able,  will  make  him  stand  in  his  daily  Christian  faith  and  life. 

Ver.  5.  One  man  esteemeth  one  day  above  another  ;  lit., 
'judges  day  above  day ; '  distinguishes  one  day  from  another,  the  ref- 
erence probably  being  to  the  Jewish  feasts  or  fasts.  This  is  a  second 
point  of  dilfereuce,  but  not  so  prominent  as  the  first,  which  is  empha- 
sized throughout.  The  occasion  of  otlence  would  be  more  frequent  in 
the  mitter  of  eating  and  drinking. — Another  esteemeth  every 
day  alike;  lit.,  'judgeth  every  day.' — Let  each  man  be  fully 
assured  in  his  own  mind.  lie  does  not  say  '  spirit,'  but, 
'  mind  ; '  the  practical  reason  is  to  be  exercised  in  the  decision  of  mat- 
ters of  personal  duty;  the  full  conviction  of  an  educated  conscience 
shoull  be  sought  fjr,  not  fancie  1  s;iiritual  intuitions. 

Ver.  6.  He  that  regardeth  the  clay,  regardeth  it  unto  the 
Lord.  However  weak  his  faith,  '  he  who  directs  his  carefulness  to 
the  day,  exercises  this  carefulness  in  his  interest  for  the  Lord,  namely, 
in  order  thereby  to  respond  to  liis  relation  of  belonging  to  theXord' 
(Meyer).  So  far  as  the  scruples  leal  to  conduct  with  this  Christian 
tone,  they  appeal  to  the  kind  tolerance  of  those  who  are  conscious  of 
greater  freedom. — The  clause  :  'and  he  that  resrardeth  not  the  day,  to 
the  Lord  he  doth  not  regard  it,'  is  omitted  by  the  best  authorities,  and 
rejected  by  most  modern  editors.  It  was  probably  inserted  to  complete 
the  antithetical  form  of  the  passage  :  though  some  who  retain  it  are  dis- 
posed to  tliink  it  was  omitted  because  it  seemed  to  be  against  the  ob- 
servance of  the  Lord's  day  and  Christian  holidays.  As  regards  the 
latter,  the  Apostle's  principle  is  against  compulsory  observance,  but 
the  Lord's  day  has  other  claims  than  those  of  Jewish  or  Christian  fes- 
tivals. The  presence  of  the  Fourth  Commandment  in  the  Decalogue, 
the  recognition  (and  explanation)  of  the  obligation  to  keep  the  Sabbath 
by  our  Lord,  as  well  as  the  relation  of  the  law  to  the  Christian  life, 
suggest  for  the  observance  of  the  Lord's  day  a  higher  sanction  than  is 
afforded  by  '  considerations  of  humanity  and  religious  expediency '  or 
by  ecclesiastical  enactment.  The  application  to  the  Jewish  Sabbath 
may  be  admitted,  but  *  the  observance  of  Sunday  does  not  comprise 


224  ROMANS  XIV.  [14:  7-10. 

7  Lord  he  eateth  not,  and  giveth  God  thanks.    For  none 
of  us  liveth  unto  himself,  and  none  dieth  to  himself. 

8  For  whether  we  live,  we  live  unto  the  Lord ;  or  whe- 
ther Ave  die,  we  die  unto  the  Lord :  whether  we  live 

9  therefore,  or  die,  we  are  the  Lord^s.     For  to  this  end 
Christ  died,  and  lived  again,  that  he  might  be  Lord 

10  of  both  the  dead  and  the  living      But  thou,  why  dost 

anything  in  common  with  that  Sabbatic  observance  which  sunders  life 
into  two  parts,  one  sacred,  the  other  profone.  It  is  this  legal  distinc- 
tion which  Paul  excludes  in  our  ver.  6  and  Col.  2'  (Godet). — And  he 
that  eateth,  eateth  unto  the  Lord,  for  he  giveth  God  thanks, 
etc.  The  Apostle  now  reverts  to  the  first  point  of  difference,  and  ap- 
plies to  both  parties  the  Christian  maxim  just  laid  down.  All  Chris- 
tians were  in  the  habit  of  thanking  God  at  meals  (and  have  been  ever 
since).  This  was  the  proof  that  the  man  who  ate  without  scruple  ate 
as  a  Christian  man,  *  unto  the  Lord; '  while  on  the  other  hand  he  who 
scrupulously  abstained  also  regarded  himself  as  abstaining  from  the 
same  Christian  motive,  and  hence  gave  thanks  unto  God  over  the  meal 
of  herbs  to  which  he  confined  himself. 

Ver.  7.  For  none  of  us  liveth  to  himself,  etc.  The  Christian's 
eating  or  not  eating  is  unto  the  Lord,  because  the  sum  of  his  earthly 
existence,  living  and  dying,  is  not  '  to  himself;  '  and  this  is  true  in  the 
case  of  all.     This  is  the  negative  side  ;  the  positive  follows. 

Ver.  8.  For  vrhether  -we  live,  v^e  live  unto  the  Lord,  /.  c, 
Christ. — "We  die  unto  the  Lord  ;  even  our  dying  is  an  act  of  con- 
secration to  Christ. — "Whether  -we  live  therefore,  etc.  The  whole 
course  of  our  existence  here  being  unto  Christ,  it  follows  that  in  all  we 
belong  to  Christ,  whose  Divine  majesty  and  power  (Bengel)  are  set 
forth  in  the  repetition  of  the  Avord  '  Lord.' 

Ver.  9.  For  to  this  end,  as  described  below,  and  including  the 
thought  of  ver.  8,  Christ  died  and  lived  again,  or,  'became  alive,' 
at  the  resurrection.  There  is  general  agreement  as  to  the  correctness 
of  the  briefer  reading,  irom  which  the  numerous  variations  can  readily 
be  explained.  That  followed  in  the  A.  V.  contains  two  errors,  and  is 
poorly  supported. — Might  be  Lord  of  both  the  dead  and  the 
living.  The  correspondence  with  what  precedes  ('  died  and  lived') 
is  intentional,  but  the  two  facts  and  classes  should  not  be  divided. 
God's  purpose  in  Christ's  death  and  resurrection  together  was  that  He 
might  be  Lord  of  the  race  of  men,  whether  in  the  state  of  the  dead  or 
stiil  living.  Hence  Christians,  whether  living  or  dying,  belong  to  Ilim 
(ver.  8).  Eph.  4:  10  contains  a  wider  thought,  which  may  be  included 
here,  though  for  the  Apostle's  argument  the  reference  to  believers  is 
quite  sufficient.  Notice,  that  the  Lordship  is  that  of  the  risen  Jesus 
Christ,  the  incarnate  Word. 

Ver.  10.     But  thou,  why  dost  thou  judge  thy  brother  ? 


14:11,12.]  ROMANS  XIV.  225 

thou  judge  thy  brother  ?  or  thou  again,  why  dost  thou 
set  at  nought  thy  brother  ?  for  we  shall  all  stand  be- 
ll fore  the  judgement-seat  of  God.     For  it  is  written, 
As  I  live,  saith  the  Lord,  to  me  every  knee  shall 

bow, 
And  every  tongue  shall  ^confess  to  God. 
12  So  then  each  one  of  us  shall  give  account  of  himself 
to  God. 

1  Or,  give  praise. 

*  Thou '  is  emphatic,  '  thou  '  belonging  to  Christ  the  Lord.  '  Thy  bro- 
ther'  marks  an  advance  in  thought  from  vers.  3,  4.  This  is  addressed 
to  the  weak  brother. — Or  thou  again,  why  dost  thou  set  at 
nought  thy  brother?     Addressed  to  the  stronger  brother,  who 

*  also,'  by  setting  at  nought  his  brother,  overlooks  the  fact  that  both 
belong  to  Christ. — For,  as  a  reason  for  both  the  preceding  questions, 
■we  shall  all  stand  before  the  judgement-seat  of  God.  The 
oldest  manuscripts  read  'God,'  which  is  accepted  by  nearly  all  modern  , 
critical  editors.  'Christ'  was  probably  substituted,  to  correspond  with 
ver.  9,  or,  from  2  Cor.  5:  10.  The  question  of  the  Divinity  of  Christ 
is  not  affected  by  the  variation.  'The  judging  of  one's  brother, 
therefore,  first  encroaches  upon  Christ's  office  as  ruler,  and,  second, 
anticipates  the  judgment  bar  of  God'  (Lange). 

Ver.  11.  For  it  is -written  (Is.  45:  23).  The  citation  is  freely 
made,  the  variations  are  :  As  I  live  for  'I  have  sworn  by  myself,'  and 
shall  confess  to  God  for  •  shall  swear'  (LXX.  'unto  God').  The 
word  'confess,'  followed  by  a  dative,  as  here,  has  the  signification, 
^render  homage,'  '  give  praise,'  hence  the  marginal  rendering  is  pref- 
erable. The  general  thought  thus  expressed  by  the  Apostle  lay  at  the 
basis  of  the  more  special  one  of  the  Old  Testament  passage.  The 
whole,  in  any  case,  is  regarded  as  a  prophecy  of  the  final  judgment, 
furnishing  a  proof  of  the  last  clause  of  ver.  10. 

Ver.  12.  So  then  each  one  of  us,  etc.  The  emphasis  rests  on 
*  each  one  of  us,'  not  on  '  of  himself,'  or,  '  to  God.'  There  is  no  ex- 
ception ;  let  each  remember  this,  and  each  will  be  guarded  against 
judging  his  brother.  '  That  which  precedes  means:  "  Do  not  judge 
thy  brother,  since  God  will  judge  A  wi;  this  verse  means:  "Judge 
thou  thyself,  since  God  will  judge  thee."'  '  /^Godet.) 
15 


226  ROMANS  XIV.  [14:13,14. 

Chapter  14:  13-23. 

Proper   Use  of    Christian  Liberty  on  the  'part   of  the 
Stronger  Brethren. 

13  Let  us  not  therefore  judge  one  another  any  more: 
but  judge  ye  this  rather,  that  no  man  put  a  stumbling- 
block  iu  his  brother's  way,  or  an  occasion  of  falling. 

14  I  know,  and  am  persuaded  in  the  Lord  Jesus,  that 
nothing  is  unclean  of  itself:  save  that  to  him  who 
accounteth  any  thing  to  be  unclean,  to  him  it  is  un- 

2.  Proper  Use  of  Christian  Liberty  on  the  part  of  the  Stronger  Brethren, 
vers.  13-23. 
The  section  opens  ^dtli  a  caution  against  judging  (ver.  13  a),  which  furnishes  a 
tjansiuon  to  the  leading  thought,  namely',  that  our  practice  should  recognize  the 
principle  of  not  causing  others  to  offend  (ver.  13  6).  This  principle  is  further  ex- 
plained and  enforced  :  our  liberty  should  not  grieve  the  weak  brother  (vers.  14-18), 
nor  destroy  in  him  the  work  of  God,  by  leading  him  to  do  what  he  has  not  freedom 
of  conscience  in  doing  (vers.  19-23). 

Ver.  13.  Let  us  not  therefore  judge  one  another  any- 
more. Both  classes  ai-e  liei-e  addressed,  since  ver.  12,  to  which 
'therefore'  refers,  included  both;  'one  another'  points  back  to  'of 
himself  in  the  same  verse.  The  clause,  however,  furnishes  a  transi- 
tion to  the  exhortation  to  the  strong. — But  judge  ye  this  rather  ; 
not  to  put,  etc.  There  is  a  play  on  the  word  'judge,'  which  here 
has  the  sense  of  forming  a  judgment  as  a  principle  of  action. — A 
stumbling  block,  etc.  Evidently  this  is  addressed  to  those  whose 
freer  conduct  gave  offence  to  the  weak  brethren.  The  two  expressions, 
here  used,  are  regarded  by  many  as  synonymous,  or  the  second  as  ex- 
planatory of  the  first.  Godet  refers  'stumbling  block'  to  that  which 
grieves  the  weak  brother,  and  *  occasion  of  falling'  to  that  which  may 
lead  him  to  sin  by  enticing  him  to  act  against  his  conscience.  This 
view  is  favored  by  the  fict  that  the  section  discusses  these  two  forms 
of  offence. — In  his  brother's  way.  Fellow  Christians  are  spoken 
to  and  spoken  of.  The  principle  does  not  apply  to  all  men,  to  the 
same  extent.  The  'brother'  is  assumed  to  have  a  conscience  more  en- 
lightened than  that  of  an  unbeliever,  whose  judgment  and  ground  of 
offence  cannot  therefore  have  the  same  weight. 

Ver.  14,  I  kno-w,  and  am  persuaded  in  the  Lord  Jesus. 
His  knowledge  on  the  point  in  question  amounts  to  full  conviction, 
growing  out  of  his  fellowship  with  Christ.  The  principle  which  he 
thus  prefaces  is  :  that  nothing  is  unclean,  lit.,  '  common,'  impure, 
according  to  the  distinction  made  by  the  Jews,  and  ascetics  generally, 
of  itself,  i.  e.,  by  nature.     There  is  some  doubt  about  the  correct 


14:  15-17.]  ROMANS  XIV.  227 

15  clean.     For  if  because  of  meat  thy  brother  is  grieved, 
.  thou  walkest  no  longer  in  love.     Destroy  not  with  thy 

16  meat  him  for  whom  Christ  died.     Let  not  then  your 

17  good  be  evil   spoken  of :  for  the  kingdom  of  God  is 
not  eating  and  drinking,  but  righteousness  and  peace 

reading  of  this  phrase,  but  the  sense  is  well  established,  Paul  thus 
declares  that  the  freer  brethren  are  in  the  right,  these  distinctions  are 
not  valid  theoretically  ;  but  practically  an  exception  must  be  made, 
which  the  Apostle  enforces  on  the  ground  of  love  (ver.  15). — But,  or, 
*  except.'  If  the  latter  sense  be  accepted,  the  exception  holds  good  in 
regard  to  '  unclean,'  not  to  '  unclean  of  itself.' — To  him  -who  ac- 
counteth,  etc.  'Accounteth'  is  the  word  used  of  justification,  it 
points  to  a  judgment,  not  to  moral  quality. — To  him  it  is  unclean  ; 
the  emphasis  rests  on  '  to  him  ; '  his  scruple  makes  it  so  for  him. 

Ver.  15.  For.  The  best  authorities  give  this  reading.  According 
to  Meyer,  it  introduces  the  reason  for  speaking  of  the  exception  (ver. 
14),  namely,  to  warn  against  the  lack  of  love  in  disregarding  it.  But 
it  may  be  connected  with  ver.  13,  and  ver.  14  taken  as  parenthetical. 
— If  because  of  thy  meat  (or,  -food)  thy  brother  is  grieved. 
The  freer  brother  would  eat  that  which  the  weaker  reckoned  unclean, 
and  the  latter  would  be  '  grieved,'  vexed  in  conscience.  This  is  not 
identical  with  'destroy,'  which  is  a  possible  result  of  it. — Thou 
■walkest  no  longer  in  love.  Love  limits  liberty,  and  substitutes 
for  it  self-denial,  even  when  the  scruple  is  an  incorrect  one. — De- 
stroy not  -with  thy  meat,  etc.  To  this  the  grieving  may  lead;  the 
Wt-ak  brother  may  be  so  influenced  as  to  act  against  his  conscience, 
and  so  sin  as  to  fill  into  eternal  destruction.  There  is  a  pathos  in  the 
closing  phrase  :  him  for  whom  Christ  died.  If  Christ  gave  up  life 
for  him,  canst  not  thou  give  up  a  kind  of  food  for  him  ?  '  Believers 
(the  elect)  are  constantly  spoken  of  as  in  danger  of  perdition.  They 
are  saved  only  if  they  continue  steadfast  unto  the  end'  (Hodge),  This 
principle  holds  good  in  this  warning  also. 

Ver.  16.  Let  not  then  your  good  be  evil  spoken  of,  lit., 
'blasphemed.'  'Then'  implies  that  to  act  in  the  way  forbidden  in 
ver.  15  would  have  this  result.  The  exhortation  may  be  applied  to  the 
strong;  'good'  referring  accordingly  to  their  Christian  liberty,  or 
strength  of  faith,  which  grieved  the  Aveak  brethren,  and  would  lead  to 
censure.  But  many  think  the  exhortation  is  addressed  to  the  whole 
Church,  since  the  plural  is  introduced  here.  '  Good  '  would  then  point 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  or  the  kingdom  of  God  (ver.  17).  Those 
who  'blasphemed'  would  be  such  of  the  outside  heathen  world  as 
noticed  the  discord.  The  wider  view  is  favored,  not  only  by  the  empha- 
sis resting  upon  '  your,'  but  by  the  existence  of  '  our '  as  a  various 
reading,  pointing  to  a  possession  of  the  whole  Church,  and  also  by  the 
thought  of  the  next  verse. 

Ver.  17.     For  the  kingdom  of  God.     This  kingdom  is  'God's 


228  ROMANS  XIV.  [14:  18,  19. 

18  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.     For  he  that  herein  serv- 
eth  Christ  is  well-pleasing  to  God,  and  approved  X)f 

19  men.     So  then  ^  let  us  follow  after  things  which  make 
for   peace,   and   things   whereby  we   may   edify   one 

1  Many  ancient  authorities  read  toe  follow. 

dominion  over  the  heart,  instituted  and  administered  by  Christ ;  it  is 
the  heavenly  sphere  of  life,  in  which  God's  word  and  Spirit  govern, 
and  whose  organ  on  the  earth  is  the  Church'  (Lange).  To  refer  it 
here  to  the  future  Messianic  kingdom  seems  impossible.  If  the  pre- 
vious verse  refers  to  Christian  liberty,  then  this  verse  urges  a  limita- 
tion of  it,  because  nothing  essential  to  the  kingdom  is  involved  in  this 
restriction.  But  if  all  are  addressed,  then  the  motive  is  derived 
from  the  wrong  estimate  of  Christianity  which  would  be  formed  by 
those  without  who  blasphemed  their  '  good.'  As  what  follows  has  a 
special  fitness  for  the  u^eak  brethren,  the  latter  view  is  further  sus- 
tained.—  Is  not  eating  and  drinking;  the  act  of  eating  and 
drinking,  not,  food  (as  in  vers.  15,  20). — But  righteousness  and 
peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  Two  views:  (1.)  'Righteous- 
ness' from  God  (=:justification),  'peace'  with  God  (=reconciliation), 
'joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost,'  produced  bj'  fellowship  with  the  Holy  Spirit; 
these  are  named  as  the  essential  matters  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  This 
is  favored  by  the  tone  of  the  entire  Epistle.  (2.)  Others  understand 
'righteousness'  as  moral  rectitude  toward  men,  'peace'  as  concord 
in  the  Church,  and  'joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost'  as  above,  but  with  a  wider 
reference  to  the  common  joy  of  Christians.  Ihis  view  is  favored  by 
the  context,  especially  vers.  18,  19,  and  by  the  practical  nature  of  the 
entire  passage.  . 

Ver.  18.  For  he  that  herein,  lit.,  'in  this,'  according  to  the 
correct  reading.  Some  have  referred  '  this '  to  the  '  Holy  Spirit,' 
which  seems  unnatural.  Othei'S,  to  avoid  the  difficulty,  retain  the 
poorly  supported  plural.  'Herein'  points  to  the  sphere  of  life,  just 
described,  and  the  verse  confirms  the  statement  of  ver.  17. — Serveth 
Christ.  This  phrase  not  only  indicates  the  moral  reference  of  what 
precedes,  but  shows  that  duty  in  the  kingdom  of  God  consists  in  ser- 
vice of  Christ. — Is  well  pleasing  to  God ;  since  such  service  is 
what  He  enjoins,  and  approved  of  men  ;  standing  the  test  of  their 
moral  judgment — 'a  fact  not  annulled  by  abnormal  manifestations,  in 
which  misapprehension,  perversion  of  the  moral  judgment,  and  the 
like  are  at  work '  (Meyer).  Men  can  approve  of  the  conduct  of  Chris- 
tians, even  while  they  hate  it  for  the  reproof  it  conveys. 

Ver.  19.  So  then  let  us  ;  an  inference  from  vers.  17,  18.  (The 
marginal  reading  is  not  well  sustained.) — Follow  after  things 
which  make  for  peace  ;  those  things  which  constitute  peace. — 
And  things  w^hereby  we  may  edify  one  another.  This  is  a 
paraphrase,  but  a  correct  one.  Here  the  edification  of  individuals  is 
is  meant ;  elsewhere  the  building  up  of  the  entire  Church  is  spoken  of. 


14:20,21.]  ROMA.NS  XIV.  229 

20  another.     Overthrow  not  for  meat's  sake  the  work  of 
God.     All  things  indeed  are  clean ;  howbeit  it  is  evil 

21  for  that  man  who  eateth  with  offence.     It  is  good  not 
to  eat  flesh,  nor  to  drink  wine,  nor  to  do  any  thing 

Godet  finds  in  this  clause  the  beginning  of  the  second  part  of  the  sec- 
tion :  not  only  follow  after  peace,  and  thus  avoid  grieving  the  weak  bro- 
ther, but  build  up,  instead  of  pulling  down,  the  work  of  God  already- 
begun  in  his  heart ;  vers.  20-23  carrying  out  the  thought. 

Ver.  20.  Overthro-w  not  for  meat's  sake  the  vrork  of  God. 
The  verb  '  overthrow '  is  in  contrast  with  '  edification,'  up-building. 
Hence  it  is  most  natural  to  refer  '  the  work  of  God'  to  the  Christian 
brother  (as  in  ver.  15),  but  here  in  his  relation  to  God  as  the  author  of 
his  spiritual  life.  (Other  explanations  :  Christian  faith,  the  extension 
of  the  kingdom  of  God,  the  fellowship  of  faith.)  To  abuse  Christian 
liberty  is  to  fight  against  God. — All  things  indeed  are  clean  (comp. 
ver.  14)  ;  howbeit  it  is  evil  for  that  man  -who  eateth  with  (lit., 
'through')  offence.  The  exhortation  is  addressed  to  the  strong  bro- 
ther, whose  principle  is  admitted  to  be  correct  ;  but  it  does  not  follow 
that  *  the  man  who  eateth  with  ofi'ence  '  is  the  freer  Christian  who  gives 
otfence  by  eating.  This  gives  to  the  phi-ase  '  through  otfence '  a  very 
forced  sense.  It  is  rather  the  weak  brother  who  is  led  by  the  example 
of  the  strong  brother  to  eat  against  his  own  conscientious  scruple.  In  such 
a  case,  according  to  the  principle  of  ver.  14,  it  is  evil  to  him.  This  is 
here  urged  upon  the  stronger  brother  as  a  motive,  not  to  eat.  Thia 
agrees  best  with  what  precedes,  and  is  as  accordant  with  the  next 
verse  as  the  other  view. 

Ver.  21.  It  is  good  j  admirable,  honorable,  morally  good,  in  view 
of  what  has  been  said  ;  hence  this  is  the  general  principle  of  action, 
for  the  st'Oiij  brother.— Not  to  eat  flesh,  etc.  This  suggests  that  the 
weak  brother  had  special  scruples  on  the  two  points  named,  totally 
abstaining  from  animal  food  and  wine.— Nor  to  do  anything. 
It  is  best  to  supply  'to  do,'  since  other  things  than  eating  and  drink- 
ing are  included.— "V7hereby ;  lit.,  'in  which,'  referring  to  all  that 
precedes.— Stumbleth.  Some  of  the  most  ancient  authorities  omit 
the  rest  of  the  verse.  While  it  is  difficult  to  decide  which  is  the  cor- 
rect reading,  the  preponderance  is  slightly  in  favor  of  the  briefer 
form.  The  principle  is  included  in  the  word  '  Stumbleth,'  which  is 
related  to  that  rendered  'oflTence'  (ver.  20).  (If  the  longer  reading 
be  accepted,  '  made  weak'  should  be  changed  to  'is  weak  ;''the  mean- 
ing being,  that  we  should  avoid  the  weak  point  of  a  Christian  brother, 
even  when  knowing  that  his  scruple  is  incorrect.)  A  strong  Christian 
should  strive  to  act  upon  the  principle  of  this  verse,  bu^  the  weak 
brother  has  no  right  to  demand  it  of  him ;  such  a  demand  is  a  confes- 
sion that  he  is  wrong  in  his  scruple.  The  self-denial  of  the  strong  is 
not  a  warrant  for  the  tyranny  of  the  weak,  who  should  study  the  pas- 
sagos  meant  especially  for  him. 


2S0  ROMANS  XIV.  [9 ;  22,  23_ 

22  whereby  thy  brother  stumbleth  ^  The  faith  which  thou 
hast,  have  thou  to  thyself  before  God.  Happy  is  he 
that  judgeth  not  himself  in  that  which  he  ^approveth. 

23  But  he  that  doubteth  is  condemned  if  he  eat,  because 
he  eateth  not  of  faith ;  and  whatsoever  is  not  of  faith 
is  sin^ 

1  Many  ancient  authorities  add  or  is  offended,  or  is  weak.  2  Or,  putteth  to  the  test. 

3  Many  authorities,  some  ancient,  insert  here  ch.  xvi.  25-z'J. 

Ver.  22.  The  faith  "which  thou  hast,  etc.  The  authority  for 
'which'  is  decisive,  and  this  reading  gives  the  above  rendering, 
which  does  not  alter  the  purport  of  the  verse.— Have  thou  to  thy- 
self before  God  ;  it  is  not  necessary  to  parade  it  before  men. 
This  is  a  commendation  of  the  position  of  the  strong  brother :  keep 
this  faith  because  it  is  well  founded,  but  keep  it  to  thyself,  when  it 
might  injure  the  weak  brother. — Happy  is  he  that  judgeth  not 
himself  in  that -which  he  approveth  ;  tests  and  then  chooses 
to  do.  '  It  is  indeed  a  happy  thing  to  have  no  self-condemnatory 
scruples  of  conscience,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  fatal  to  have 
scruples  and  to  disregard  them'  (Sanday). 

Ver.  23.  But  he  that  doubteth  (in  contrast  with  the  one  who 
judgeth  not  himself )  is  .(has  been  and  is)  condemned  if  he  eat. 
♦The  act  of  eating  itself  condemns  him,  of  course,  according  to  the 
Divine  ordering,  so  that  the  justice  of  this  verdict  appears  not  only 
before  God,  but  before  men,  and  hiaiself  also'  (Philippi).  This 
guards  against  the  extreme  view,  that  'condemned'  refers  to  eternal 
condemnation  —Because  ht  eateth  (or,  'it  is')  net  of  faith  ;  his 
eating  was  not  an  ethical  result  of  his  faith  in  Christ ;  comp.  vers.  1, 
2. — And  ('for'  is  incorrect)  whatsoever  is  not  of  faith  is  sin. 
This  is  the  general  truth  underlying  the  previous  statements.  'Faith' 
here  is  saving  faith  (and  not  subjective,  moral  conviction),  regarded 
as  a  principle  of  life,  informing  the  morals  of  the  Christian.  '  It 
refers  as  always  to  the  acceptance  of  the  salvation  obtained  through 
Christ.  That  which  one  cannot  do  as  his  redemption  and  in  the  en- 
joyment of  His  salvation,  he  should  not  do  at  all,  otherwise  that  act  of 
which  fiith  is  not  the  soul,  becomes  sin,  and  can  conduct  to  the  result 
indicated  in  ver.  20  :  the  total  destruction  of  the  work  of  God  in  us' 
(Godet). — The  conduct  of  Christians  alone  is  under  discussion;  so 
that  there  is  no  direct  application  of  the  principle  to  unbelievers. 
But  making  due  allowance  for  the  statements  of  chap.  2 :  14,  15,  re- 
specting the  natural  law  of  conscience,  the  passage  furnishes  a  strong 
indirect  proof  of  the  sinfulness  of  all  acts  not  resulting  from  faith  ; 
especially  in  view  of  the  previous  demonstration  of  the  Apostle  in 
chaps.  3:  18-20.  The  more  important  matter  is,  however,  to  remem- 
ber that  for  Christians,  at  least.  Christian  ethics  should  have  full  valid- 
ity, and  that  here  the  principle  admits  of  no  exception  :  whatsoever  is 
not  of  faith  is  sin ;  genuine  Christian  morality  is  all  of  faith.  On  the 
doxology  inserted  at  this  point  in  some  authorities,  see  p.  225. 


15:  1-3.]  ROMANS  XV.  231 

Chapter  15:  1-13. 

General  Discussion  of  the  Relations  of  the  Strong  and 

Weak. 

1  Now  we  that  are  strong  ought  to  bear  the  infirm i- 

2  ties  of  the  weak,  and  not  to  please  ourselves.     Let 
each  one  of  us  please  his  neighbour  for  that  which  is 

3  good,   unto    edifying.     For  Christ  also    pleased    not 
himself ;  but,  as  it  is  written,  The  reproaches  of  them 

3.   General  Discussion  of  the  Relations  of  the  Strong  and  Weak,  passing 
over  into  Expressions  of  Christian  Praise,  vers.  1-13. 

This  section  opens  with  a  statement  of  the  principle  which  should  govern  the  strong 
brethren  (ver.  1),  which  is  at  once  extended  to  both  classes  (ver.  2).  as' an  injunction  to 
please  our  neighbor.  The  motiTe  is  found  in  tlie  example  of  Christ,  as  indicated  in 
an  Old  Testament  prophecy  (ver.  3).  The  quotation  suggests  the  patience  and  com- 
fort of  the  Scriptures  (ver.  4),  the  word  of  the  God  of  patience  and  comfort  (ver.  5) 
who  alone  can  unite  their  hearts  for  common  praise  of  the  Father  (ver.  6).  Common 
praise  suggests  anew  the  duty  of  fellowship,  even  as  Christ  received  them  all  that 
all  might  praise  God  (ver.  T  .  For  lie  received  Jews  to  fulfil  God's  promises  (ver.  8), 
and  Gentiles  to  awaken  praise  for  God's  mercy,  as  the  Scriptures  abundantly  testify 
(vers.  9-12).  The  section  closes  appropriately,  invoking  blessings  from  the  God  of 
hope  (ver.  13). 

On  the  special  questions  respecting  chaps.  15  and  '  6,  see  pp.  255,  2J6. 

Ver.  1.  Now  -we  that  are  strong.  'Then'  is  incorrect, 
though  the  connection  is  logically  Avitli  what  precedes. — Ought  to 
bear,  as  a  burden  is  borne. — The  infirmities  of  the  weak  ;  all 
such  "weaknesses  of  faith,  but  particularly  tho:ie  referred  to  in  the  pre- 
vious discussion.  This  bearing  is  often  simply  forbearing,  but  fre- 
quently involves  foi'giving,  and  self-denying.  '  Thus  they,  in  them- 
selves strong  and  free,  become  the  sei'vants  of  the  weak,  as  Paul  was 
servant  of  all;  1  Cor.  9:  19,  22'  (Meyer).  PTo  U  indeed  strong  who 
can  thus  bear. — And  not  to  please  ourselves.  Such  moral  sel- 
fishness is  involved  in  disregarding  the  weaknesses  of  the  brethren 
who  have  false  scruples. 

Ver.  2.  Let  each  one  of  us  (weak  as  well  as  strong)  please  his 
neighbour  for  that  V7hich  is  good,  lit.,  '  the  good,'  but  it  seems 
best  lo  explain  '  for  his  benefit.' — Unto  edification,  with  a  view  to 
building  him  up  in  Christian  character,  defines  more  especially 
wherein  this  '  good  '   consists. 

Ver.  3.  For  Christ  also,  etc.  'Also'  is  slightly  preferable  to 
'  even.'  <  The  example  of  Christ  is  for  the  believer  the  new  law  to  be 
made  real  (Gal.  G:  2);  hence  the  for  also'  (Godet.)— But,  as  it  is 
•written  (Ps.  GO:  9),  the  reproaches  of  them  that  reproached 


232  ROMANS  XV.  [15 :  4-6. 

4  that  reproached  thee  fell  upon  me.  For  whatsoever 
things  were  written  aforetime  were  written  for  our 
learning,  that  through  patience  and  through  comfort 

5  of  the  scriptures  we  might  have  hope.  Now  the  God 
of  patience  and  of  comfort  grant  you  to  be  of  the  same 

C  mind  one  with  another  according  to  Christ  Jesus :  that 

thee  fell  upon  me.  The  citation  is  from  the  LXX.,  which  literally 
reproduces  the  Hebrew.  The  clause  may  be  connected  directly  with 
*  but ;  '  some  supplying  :  *  it  came  to  pass,'  before  '  it  is  written.'  In 
the  Psalm,  '  thee  '  refers  to  God,  and  '  me '  to  the  Messiah,  or  the  per- 
son who  i-^  a  type  of  the  Messiah.  The  sufferings  of  Christ,  accordiug 
to  the  Pgalm,  were  to  fulfil  the  Father's  purpose;  since  this  purpose 
was  for  the  s  ilvation  of  men  the  passage  has  here  its  most  appro- 
priate application. 

Ver.  4.  For.  This  introduces  a  justification  of  the  previous  cita- 
tion, and  a  preparation  for  the  subject  which  follows,  the  duty  of  being 
'of  the  same  mind  one  toward  another '  (ver.  6). — "Whatsoever 
things  -were  written  aforetime.  Evidently  including  the  whole 
Old  Testament. — "Were  ■written  for  our  learning  ;  to  instruct  us 
also  ;  the  immediate  design  does  not  preclude  this  further  and  perma- 
nent one,  a  principle  which  underlies  many  other  citations  made  by 
the  Apostle. — That  through  patience  and  through  comfort  of 
the  scriptures.  '  Of  the  Scriptures  '  qualifies  both  words  :  the  pa- 
tience and  comfort  produced  by  a  study  of  the  Scriptures;  the  re- 
peated '  through '  does  not  disconnect  them,  but  gives  rhetoi-ical  em- 
phasis. '  Patience '  is  especially  needed  to  hold  out  in  not  pleasing 
ourselves  (ver.  1),  and  'comfort'  or,  'consolation,'  that  we  may  find 
joy  therein. — We  might  have  hope,  lit.,  'the  hope,'  the  specific 
hope  of  the  Christian,  possessing  more  and  more  of  it  by  means  of  the 
patience,  etc.  Those  who  neglect  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  may 
well  remember  that  this  expresses  the  Christian  experience  of  an  in- 
spired Apostle. 

Ver.  5.  Now  the  God  of  patience  and  of  comfort  (as  in  ver. 
4).  '  He  well  knows  that  the  Scripture  itself  is  inefficacious  without 
help  of  the  God  of  the  Scriptures'  (Godet).  He  is  the  source  of  the 
patience  and  comfort  they  afford. — Grant  you  to  be  of  the  same 
mind  one  with  another.  Thus  the  Apostle  returns  to  the  leading 
thought  of  the  section.  '  To  be  of  the  same  mind '  points  to  harmony 
of  feeling  In  their  intercourse,  rather  than  to  unanimity  of  opinion  on 
the  disputed  points  of  practice.  For  such  harmony  patience  and  com- 
fort are  needed;  only  the  God  of  patience  and  comfort  can  produce 
these,  but  He  produces  them  through  the  Scriptures. — According  to 
Christ  Jesus.  According  to  His  example  (ver.  3),  but  also  accord- 
ing to  His  will  as  Head  of  the  Church  and  according  to  His  Spirit  as 
the  Life  of  the  Church. 

Ver.  6.     That  with  one  accord  ye  may  with  one  mouth 


15:    7,8.]  ROMANS  XV.  233 

with  one  accord  ye  may  with  one  moutli  glorify  the 

7  God  and  Father  *  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Where- 
fore receive  ye  one  another,  even  as  Christ,  also  re- 

8  ceived  ^you,  to  the  glory  of  God.  For  I  say  that 
Christ  hath  been  made  a  minister  of  the  circumcision 
for  the  truth  of  God,  tliat  he  might  confirm  the  pro- 

*  Or,  God  and  the  Fdther. — Am.  Com. 
1  Some  ancieut  authorities  read  us. 

glorify,  etc.  '  One  accord  '  results  from  being  *  of  the  same  mind  ' 
and  is  in  its  turn  the  source  of  the  praising  'with  one  mouth.'  It  is 
in  tlie  utterance  of  common  praise  that  harmony  of  feeling  finds  its 
highest  expression. — The  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  The  phrase  is  the  same  as  in  Eph.  1 :  3.  Here  as  there,  it 
seems  better  to  connect  '  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ '  with  both  words. 
The  rendering  of  the  A.  V.,  and  of  the  margin  of  the  Am.  Com.  is, 
however,  grammatjciilly  unobjectionable  (comp.  the  list  of  passages  in 
the  Appendix  of  the  American  Committee). 

Ver.  7.  "Wherefore  receive  ye  one  another,  etc.  Since  this 
utterance  of  praise  is  so  sacred  a  piivilege,  they  are  exhorted,  strong 
and  weak  alike,  to  receive  one  another  (comp.  chap.  14  :  1)  in  Christian 
fellowship. — Even  as  Christ  also  received  you.  Good  authorities 
read  '  us  ; '  but  the  weight  of  evidence  is  in  favor  of  '  you,'  which  here 
includes  all  the  Roman  Christians,  not  merely  those  of  Gentile  origin. — 
To  the  glory  of  God,  i.  c,  that  God  might  be  glorified.  This  is  to 
be  joined  with  '  as  Christ  also  received  you,'  since  vers.  8,  9,  explain 
this  purpose  of  Christ's  receiving  them.  This  is,  however,  a  motive 
for  receiving  one  another,  that  all  may  together  praise  God.  (Comp. 
ver.  6.) 

Ver.  8.  For  I  say.  'For'  is  strongly  supported,  and  introduces 
the  explanation  of  how  Christ  had  received  both  Jewish  Christians  (ver. 
8),  and  those  of  Geniile  origin  (ver.  9)  :  'the  connection  of  the  former 
with  Christ  appears  as  the  fulfilment  of  their  theocratic  claim,  but  that  of 
the  latter  as  the  enjoipnent  of  grace '  (Meyer).—  That  Christ  (the  word 
'Jesus'  is  to  be  omitted)  hath  been  made  (not  only  became,  but 
continues  to  be)  a  minister  of  the  circumcision;  /.  e.,  those  cir- 
cumcised, as  so  frequently  in  Paul's  writings.  The  emphasis  rests  on 
the  word  '  minister '  which  suggests  the  condescension  of  Christ,  as  an 
example  of  humility.  His  obedience  to  the  law  (Gal.  4:4;  Phil.  2: 
7'  may  also  be  susrgested,  showing  how  he  entered  into  fellowship 
with  the  weak. — For  the  truth  of  God  (His  veracity)  that  he 
might  confirm  (by  fulfilmnt)  the  promises  given  unto  the 
fathers  fin  the  Old  Testament).  Thus  Christ's  receiving  the  Jews 
was  '  to  tlie  glory  of  God,'  showing  His  faithfulness,  and  this  furnished 
a  motive  for  fellowship.  'That  he  might'  (R.  V.)  is  substituted  for 
'to'  (A.  v.),  to  indicate  the  parallelism  with  ver.  9. 


234  ROMANS  XV.  |;15:  9-12. 

9  mises  given  unto  the  fathers,  and  that  the  Gentiles 
might  glorify  God  for  his  mercy  ;  as  it  is  written, 
Therefore  will  I  ^give  praise  unto  thee  among  the 

Gentiles, 
And  sing  unto  thy  name. 

10  And  again  he  saith, 

Rejoice,  ye  Gentiles,  with  his  people. 

11  And  again, 

Praise  the  Lord,  all  ye  Gentiles ; 
And  let  all  the  peoples  praise  him. 

12  And  again,  Isaiah  saith, 

1  Or,  confess. 

Yer.  9.  And  that  the  Gentiles  might  glorify  God.  This 
expresses  another  purposed  result  of  Christ's  having  been  made  a  min- 
ister. Many  commentators,  however,  take  it  as  dependent  upon  '  I 
say'  (so  A.  Y.),  yet  praised  (at  the  time  of  conversion),  or,  ought  to 
praise,  or,  do  praise.  But  Christ's  ministry  among  the  Jews  hath  this 
further  purpose;  comp.  Gal.  4:  5.— For  his  mercy.  Whatever 
view  be  taken  of  the  construction  this  is  tlie  main  point  of  contrast. 
In  the  case  of  the  Jews  God's  faithfulness  was  proven,  in  the  case  of 
the  Gentiles  His  mercy. — As  it  is -written  (Ps.  18:  50),  For  this 
cause  I  ■will  give  praise  (comp.  chap.  14:  11)  unto  thee  among 
the  Gentiles  (lit.,  '  among  Gentiles  ' ),  etc.  The  quotation,  made  ex- 
actly from  the  LXX.,  '  originally  spoken  by  David  of  his  joy  after  his 
deliverance  and  triumphs,  is  prophetically  said  of  Christ  in  His  own 
Person.  It  is  addressed  to  show  that  among  the  Gentiles  Christ's  tri- 
umphs were  to  take  pLice,  as  well  as  among  the  Jews '  (Alford). 

Yer.  10.  Rejoice,  ye  Gentiles,  -with  his  people.  From  the 
LXX.,  Deut.  o'l:  43.  But  our  Hebrew  text  reads:  'Rejoice,  0  ye 
nations.  His  people.'  Probably  the  LXX.  follows  another  reading, 
though  other  explanations  have  been  suggested.  In  any  case  the  praise 
of  Gentiles  is  predicted. 

Yer.  11.  Praise  the  Lord,  all  ye  Gentiles.  From  Ps.  117  :  1, 
exactly  after  the  LXX.,  in  this  clause  ;  in  the  second  the  best  authori- 
ties support  the  reading:  and  let  all  the  peoples  praise  him. 
The  A.  V.  follows  the  text  which  conforms  to  the  LXX. 

Yer.  12.  Isaiah  saith  (Is.  11:  10);  from  the  LXX.— There 
shall  be,  etc.  The  Hebrew  is  more  closely  rendered  in  our  version  : 
'  And  in  that  day  there  shall  be  a  root  of  Jesse,  which  shall  stand  for 
an  ensign  of  the  people  ;  to  it  shall  the  Gentiles  seek.'  But  the  LXX. 
presents  the  same  thought  in  a  strengthened  form  well  suited  to  the 
Apostle's  purpose.  These  citations,  taken  from  the  three  divisions  of 
the  Old  Testament  (Law,  Psalms,  and  Prophets)  confirm  Paul's  view 
of  his  own  work  as  well  as  furnish  a  motive  for  unity.    The  last  clause  : 


15:  13.]  ROMANS  XV.  235 

There  shall  be  the  root  of  Jesse, 
And  he  that  ariseth  to  rule  over  the  Gentiles ; 
On  him  shall  the  Gentiles  hope. 
13  Now  the  God  of  hope  fill  you  with  all  joy  and  peace 

in  believing,  that  ye  may  abound  in  hope,  in  the  power 

of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

on  Mm  shall  the  Gentiles  hope,  forms  a  fitting  conclusion.  Thus 
through  the  patience  and  comfort  of  the  Scriptures  he  had  hope  (ver. 
4),  and  this  all  might  have.  '  For  this  adoration  of  the  Gentiles,  to 
which  the  four  preceding  citations  refer,  is  the  fruit  not  only  of  the 
enjoyment  of  actual  blessings  but  also  and  preeminently  of  the  hope 
of  future  blessings'  (Godet). 

Ver.  13.  Now  the  God  of  hope,  etc.  Most  aptly  is  God  here 
called  the  God  of  hope  (comp.  the  similar  repetition,  vers.  4,  5),  the 
God  who  produces  the  hope  they  possess.  'As  vers.  1-4  passed  into  a 
blessing  (vers.  5,  6),  so  now  the  hortatory  discourse,  begun  afresh  in 
ver.  7,  passes  into  a  blessing,  wliich  forms,  at  the  same  time  the  close 
of  the  entn-e  section  (from  chap.  14  onwards).'  (Meyer.) — "With  all 
joy  and  peace.  These  are  based  on  hope,  but  are  the  direct  fruit  of 
believing. — The  end  of  this  being  filled  with  joy  and  peace  is  the 
increase  in  turn  of  hope  :  that  ye  may  abound  in  hope  ;  and 
this  not  by  their  owii  power,  but  in  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
'  Believing,'  is  the  subjective  state,  but  this  is  the  objective  means,  the 
inworking  power.  As  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  author  of  peace,  and  as 
faith  and  hope,  peace  and  joy,  are  the  greatest  helps  to  true  unity, 
this  benediction  is  a  fitting  close  to  the  exhortation  respecting  mutual 
forbearance  and  true  fellowship,  which  forms  the  most  striking  passage 
in  the  practical  part  of  the  Epistle.  The  Apostle's  main  task  is  now 
completed ;  he  prepares  at  once  for  the  conclusion  of  his  letter. 

III.  Concluding  Portion  of  the  Epistle. 

This  part  of  the  Fpistle  may  be  divided  into  four  secMons.  (1.)  Personal  explana- 
tions, similar  to  those  in  chap.  1 :  8-15  (chap.  15 :  14-33).  (2.)  Greetings  to  different 
persons  at  Rome  (chap.  16:  1-16).  (3.)  Closing  exhortation,  with  gr.  etings,  from 
various  persons  (chap.  16 :  17-24).     (4.)  Concluding  Doxology  (chap.  16 :  25-27). 

1.  Personal  Explanations,  vers.  14-33. 
This  section  forms  an  '  epilogue '  (Meyer),  corresponding  in  matter  with  the  intro- 
ductory paragraph;  chap.  1  ;  8-15.  The  Apostle  first  expre-sses  his  confidence  in  the 
Roman  Christians,  and.  in  a  partially  apologetic  tone,  justifies  his  writing  to  them  by 
a  reference  to  his  office  as  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles  (vers.  14-16),  by  a  statement  of  his 
principle  of  labor  (vers.  17-21),  which  had  hindered  him  from  g.-ing  to  Rome  (ver.  22). 
He  then  speaks  of  his  hope  of  visiting  them  (vers.  22,  24),  after  he  had  fulfilled  his 
service  in  carrying  alms  to  the  poor  saints  at  Jerusalem  (vers.  25-29\  in  which  ser- 
vice and  hope  he  asks  their  prayers  (vers.  30-32),  adding  a  brief  benediction  (ver.  33), 


230  ROMANS  XV.  [15 :  14-16. 

Chapter  15:  14^33. 
Personal  Explanations, 

14  And  I  myself  also  am  persuaded  of  you,  my  breth- 
ren, that  ye  yourselves  are  full  of  goodness,  filled  with 
all   knowledge,  able  also  to  admonish  one  another. 

15  But  I  write  the  more  boldly  unto  you  in  some  mea- 
sure, as  putting  you  again  in  remembrance,  because  of 

16  the  grace  that  was  given  me  of  God,  that  I  should  be 
a  minister  of  Christ  Jesus  unto  the  Gentiles,  ^minis- 
tering the  gospel  of  God,  that  the  offering  up  of  the 
Gentiles  might  be  made  acceptable,  being  sanctified 

1  Gr.  miniatering  in  sacrifices. 

Ver.  14.  And  I  myself  also,  or,  '  even  I  myself.'  The  latter 
implies:  'even  1,  the  one  who  has  just  admonished  youj  have  this 
favorable  conviction  respecting  you'  ;  the  former,  '  I  of  myself,'  with- 
out the  testimony  of  others,  or,  '  I  as  well  as  others.'  The  first  view 
accords  with  chap.  7  :  25,  but  the  implied  contrast  in  ver.  15  seems  to 
favor  the  second.— My  brethren.  This  direct  affectionate  address 
indicates  the  return  to  more  personal  mattei'S. — Ye  yourselves  ; 
'  without  any  exhortation  of  mine'  (Alford). — Are  full  of  goodness  ; 
moral  excellence  in  general,  though  it  may  be  specially  applied  to 
kindness, — Filled  "with  all  knowledge  ;  Christian  knowledge, 
moral  as  well  as  intellectual. — Able  also  to  admonish  one  an- 
other; Avithout  assistance  from  without.  This  is  a  special  result  of 
the  preceding  qualities  ascribed  to  them.  It  requires  abundance  of 
goodness  as  well  as  of  knowledge  to  fit  us  for  mutual  admonition. 

Ver.  15.  But  (though  I  am  convinced  of  this,  yet)  I  write  (lit., 
•  I  wrote,'  in  this  Epistle)  the  more  boldly  (in  contrast  with  the 
assurance  of  ver.  14  respecting  their  goodness,  etc.)  unto  you  in 
some  measure  ;  ?.  e.,  in  parts  of  this  Epistle ;  the  phi-ase  qualifies 
the  verb,  not  '  more  boldly '  as  if  the  sense  were  :  '  somewhat  too 
boldly.'— As  putting  you  again  in  remembrance  ;  simply  as  one 
who  reminds  you.— Because  of  the  grace  that  was  given,  etc. 
His  apostolic  office  is  referred  to  in  this  phrase ;  this  was  the  ground 
and  reason  of  his  boldness.  But  notice  the  humility  of  the  great 
Apostle. 

Ver.  16.  That  I  should  be,  etc.  The  purpose  of  the  grace 
given  him. — A  minister ;  not  the  word  usually  so  rendered  (as  in 
ver.  8),  but  one  applied  to  a  minister  in  public  worship  (our  word 
'  liturgy  '  is  allied  to  this) ;  it  is  more  closely  defined  by  what  follows. 
— Of  Christ  Jesus ;  as  the  Head  and  King  of  the  Church,  not  as 
Highpriest.— Ministering  the  gospel  of  God.     The  word  'minis- 


15:  17-19.]  ROMANS  XV.  237 

17  by  the  Holy  Ghost.     I  have  therefore  my  glorying 

18  ill  Christ  Jesus  in  things  pertaining  to  God.  For  I 
will  not  dare  to  speak  of  any  things  save  those  which 
Christ  wrought  through  me,  for  the  obedience  of  the 

19  Gentiles,  by  word  and  deed,  in  the  power  of  signs  and 

1  Gr.  of  those  things  which  Christ  loroiight  not  through  me. 

tering '  does  not  correspond  with  the  previous  one,  but  distinctly  ex- 
presses priestly  service  (R.  V.  marg. ).  Yet  the  gospel  is  not  the  offer- 
ing, hut  in  his  preaching  of  the  gospel  he  renders  priestly  service,  and 
in  this  way :  that  the  offering  up  of  the  Gentiles,  the  offering 
consisting  of  them,  might  be  made  acceptable,  being  sanctified 
by  the  Holy  Ghost ;  not  consecrated  alter  the  Levitical  ritual,  but 
truly  by  means  of  the  indwelling  Spirit.  This  verse  is  properly  used 
to  oppose  the  idea  that  the  Christian  ministry  is  a  priesthood.  If  the 
Apostle  had  laid  any  claim  to  sacerdotal  functions,  or  designed  to  give 
any  warrant  for  such  claim  on  the  part  of  Christian  ministers,  he 
would  not  have  expressed  himself  as  he  does  here.  The  offering  is 
figurative  ;  the  priestly  functions  are  figurative.  '  This  is  my  priest- 
hood, to  preach  the  gospel.  My  knife  is  the  word,  ye  are  the  sacri- 
fice' (Theophylact).     'With  such  sacrifices  God  is  well  pleased.' 

Yer.  17.  I  have  therefore  my  glorying;  comp.  chap.  3:  27; 
here  used  in  a  good  sense. — In  (not  '  through  ')  Christ  Jesus  ;  only 
in  fellowship  with  Him  can  he  glory ;  thus  incidentally  opposing  the 
thought  that  his  glorying  was  in  himself. — In  things  pertaining  to 
God,  lit.,  '  the  things  toward  God,'  referring  to  his  '  ministering  as  a 
priest,'  etc.  (ver.  16).  It  does  not  limit,  but  defines  the  '  glorying.* 
The  explanation :  'I  have  offerings  for  God,  namely.  Gentile  converts,* 
seems  far-fetched.  This  verse  furnishes  a  transition  to  the  statement 
of  the  principle  governing  his  laboi'S  (vers.  17-21),  the  carrying  out 
of  which  had  hindered  him  from  visiting  Rome'  (ver.  22). 

Yer.  18.  For  I  "will  not  dare  ('  be  bold,'  probably  in  allusion  to 
ver.  15)  to  speak,  etc.  The  emphasis  rests  not  on  the  word  Christ, 
but  on  the  phrase,  wrought  not,  literally  rendered  in  the  margin, 
*  wrought  not  through  me  '  ;  the  contrast  being,  not  with  what  he  did 
of  himself,  or  strictly  with  what  others  did,  but  more  exactly  with 
what  Christ  had  wrought  through  him.  The  sense  is  :  I  will  speak 
boldly,  have  my  ground  of  glorying,  only  in  such  things  as  Christ 
wrought  through  me. — For  the  obedience  of  the  Gentiles,  with 
this  design  and  result,  that  they  became  obedient  to  Christ  by  believing 
in  Him. — By  -word  and  deed.  This  phrase  qualifies  '  did  work 
through  me,' etc.  'Word'  refers  to  his  preaching ;  'deed'  includes 
all  the  other  labors  of  his  apostolic  activity. 

Yer.  19.  In  the  power  of  signs  and  wonders,  in  the 
power  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Some  authorities  read  '  Spirit  of  God,' 
and  the  Yatican  manuscript  has  '  Spirit '  alone ;    but  the  best  estab- 


238  ROMANS  XV.  [15 :  19, 20. 

wonders,  in  the  power  of  4he  Holy  Ghost;  so  that 
from  Jerusalem,  and  round  about  even  unto  Illyri- 
cum,  I  have  ^ fully  preached  the  gospel  of  Christ; 
20  yea,  ^making  it  my  aim  so  to  preach  the  gospel,  not 
where  Christ  was  already  named,  that  I  might  not 

1  Many  ancient  authorities  read  the  Spirit  of  God.     One  reads  the  Spirit. 
2  Gr  fulfilled.  ^  Gr.  being  ambitious. 

lished  form  is  as  above.  The  two  clauses  are  parallel,  and  should  be 
closely  joined  with  what  precedes.  Christ  wrought  through  him,  in 
word  and  work,  in  virtue  of  these  powers ;  that  proceeding  from  (mi- 
raculous) signs  and  wonders,  and  that  which  came  from  the  Holy- 
Spirit  working  thi'ough  him  on  the  minds  of  men.  *A  miracle  is  a 
sign,  inasmuch  as  it  teaches  truth  :  it  is  a  wonder,  in  that  it  creates 
astonishment'  (Beet), — So  that  from  Jerusalem,  the  actual  start- 
ing-point of  his  apostolical  labors  (Acts  4:  28,  29;  22:  18),  round 
about,  not  in  the  arc  of  a  circle,  but  in  a  wide  circuit,  round  about 
Jerusalem.— Even  unto  lUyricum.  lUyriouni  was  north  of  Macedo- 
nia. No  mention  is  made  in  the  Book  of  Acts  of  a  visit  there.  Hence 
many  have  thought  that  the  Apostle  thus  indicates  the  limit  of  labors. 
But  it  is  quite  probable  that  during  the  journey  menfioned  in  Acts 
20:  1-3  (just  before  the  writing  of  this  Epistle),  he  actually  entered 
that  region. — I  have  fully  preached  (lit.,  'have  fulfilled')  the 
gospel  of  Christ.  The  A.  V.  fairly  presents  the  sense,  though  a 
variety  of  other  explanations  have  been  suggested,  e.  ff.,  have  given 
the  gospel  its  full  dimensions,  completely  proclaimed  it,  accomplished 
everything  with  it,  etc.  He  had  fully  spread  the  glad  tidings  and 
with  success  everywhere,  sufficient  to  attest  his  apostolic  mission,  and 
give  him  a  ground  of  glorying  in  what  Christ  had  wrought  through 
him. 

Ver,  20.  Yea,  making  it  my  aim.  The  participle  here  used 
means,  '  to  make  it  a  point  of  honor,'  but  this  exact  sense  need  not  be 
pressed  here. — So  to  preach  the  gospel ;  '  to  evangelize,'  not  the 
same  word  as  in  ver.  19.  'So,'  i.  e.,  in  this  manner  (as  afterwards 
defined),  may  qualify  the  participle,  but  the  sense  is  better  expressed 
in  English  by  the  above  rendering. — Not  -where  Christ  was 
already  namad.  'Already'  is  properly  supplied  ;  'named,  as  the 
object  of  fiith  and  the  Person  to  be  confessed,  by  other  laborers,  as 
appears  from  the  next  clause  :  that  I  might  not,  etc.  This  principle, 
here  negatively  stated,  was  not  adopted  to  avoid  opposition,  or  in  con- 
sequence of  differences  with  the  other  Apostles,  nor  yet  of  an  arrange- 
ment to  divide  geographically  the  mission  field,  but  resulted  from  the 
high  sense  of  his  duty  as  an  Apostle,  to  lay  the  foundation  of  a  univer- 
sal Church.  His  writing  to  Rome  was  not  contrary  to  this  principle, 
which  concerned  his  labor  in  person,  not  his  intercourse  by  letter  with 
churches  he  had  not  founded. 


15 :  21-24.]  ROMANS  XV.  239 

21  build  upon  another  man's  foundation;  but,  as  it  is 
written, 

They  shall  see,  to  whom  no  tidings  of  him  came. 
And  they  who  have  not  heard  shall  understand. 

22  Wherefore  also  I  was  hindered  these  many  times 

23  from  coming  to  you  :  but  now,  having  no  more  any 
place  in  these  regions,  and  having  these  many  years  a 

24  longing  to  come  unto  you,  Avhensoever  I  go  unto  Spain 
(for  I  hope  to  see  you  in  my  journey,  and  to  be 
brought  on  my  way  thitherward  by  you,  if  first  in 
some  measure  I  shall  have  been  satisfied  with  your 

Ver.  21.  But,  preaching  the  gospel  in  this  way,  not  where  others 
had  preached,  but  as  it  is  ■written  (according  to  this  rule  of  Scrip- 
ture), They  shall  see,  to  whom  no  tidings  of  him  came.  And 
they,  etc.  From  Is.  52:  15,  I'ollowing  the  LXX.,  which  adds  'of 
him"  (corap.  the  A.  V.,  which  renders  the  Hebrew  accurately).  The 
prophecy  refers  to  '  kings,'  but  is  properly  applied  to  nations  whom 
they  represent ;  the  wide  extension  of  the  Messiah's  kingdom  being 
the  main  thought. 

Yer.  22.  Wherefore  also.  Because  of  this  aim  of  wide  mission- 
ary activity,  not  because  a  church  had  already  been  formed  at  Rome. 
— I  -was  hindered  these  many  times  (or,  '  for  the  most  part'). 
Some  authorities  read  :  '  oftentimes'  as  in  chap.  1 :  13  ;  but  the  usual 
reading  is  better  supported.  Of  the  two  renderings  given,  the  latter 
refers  to  the  principal  (though  not  the  onl}^)  cause  of  his  not  visiting 
them  ;  the  other,  to  the  frequency  of  the  hindering.  Either  is  allow- 
able, but  we  prefer  the  latter. 

Vers.  23,  24.  The  construction  of  these  verses  occasions  much 
diificulty,  Avhich  was  relieved  by  the  insertion  of  the  clause  (ver.  24): 
*  I  will  come  to  you,'  to  complete  the  sense  :  decisive  authority  prov- 
ing the  words  to  be  an  interpolation.  Another  attempt  to  relieve  the 
abruptness  was  made  by  omitting  '  for '  in  the  same  verse  ;  but  here  too 
the  Aveightiest  evidence  is  against  the  easier  reading.  We  are  compelled 
then  to  accept  a  broken  construction  as  follows  :  '  But  now  no  more 
having  place  in  these  parts,  and  having  these  many  years  a  longing  to 
come  unto  you,  Tv-honsoever  I  journey  into  Spain  (for  I  hope,  as  1  am 
journeying  through,  to  see  you,  and  to  be  sent  forward  thither  by  you, 
if  fii'St  I  be  in  some  measure  filled  with  your  company) — but  now,'  etc. 
The  sense  would  be  the  same,  if  the  participles  of  ver.  23  were  ren- 
dered as  verbs,  and  a  period  placed  after  the  word  '  Spain.' — But 
now.  The  Apostle  begins  to  say  that  the  main  hindrance  is  re- 
moved ;  in  ver.  25  he  states  the  special  season  for  delay. — Having 
no  more  any  place.  Opportunity  to  carry  out  this  principle  of 
labor. — In  these  regions  ;  spoken  of  in  ver.  19. — Whensoever 


240  ROMANS  XV.  [15 !  25-27. 

25  company) — but  now  I  say,  I  go  unto  Jerusalem,  mln- 

26  istering  unto  the  saints.  For  it  hath  been  the  good 
pleasure  of  Macedonia  and  Achaia  to  make  a  certain 
contribution  for  the  poor  among  the  saints  that  are  at 

27  Jerusalem.  Yea,  it  hath  been  their  good  pleasure  ; 
and  their  debtors  they  are.  For  if  the  Gentiles  have 
been  made  partakers  of  their  spiritual  things,  they 
owe  it  to  them  also  to  minister  unto  them  in  carnal 

1  go  unto  Spain.  Paul  does  not  use  the  common  Greek  name  for 
Spain  ('Iberia'),  nor  even  the  exact  Latin  one.  "Whether  this  pur- 
pose was  ever  fulfilled  is  unknown,  and  immaterial  as  respects  the 
visit  to  Rome.  God's  purpose,  not  Paul's,  was  cartied  out  in  the 
actual  visit  to  the  imperial  city. — Hope  ;  not,  '  trust.' — In  my  jour- 
ney. This  qualifies  both  the  following  clauses. — And  to  be 
brought  on  my  "way  thither"ward  by  you.  (Some  authorities 
read:  '  from  you.')  He  hoped  to  obtain  couipanions,  and  doubtless 
other  friendly  furtherance. — In  some  measure  ;  *  not  as  much  as  I 
will,  but  as  much  as  is  permitted  '  (Grotius).  Kot  merely  complimen- 
tary.—Satisfied  vrith  your  company.  •  Spiritual  satisfaction 
through  the  enjoyment  of  the  longed-for  personal  intercourse.* 
(Meyer.) 

Ver.  25.  But  no"W.  Partly  resumptive  of  ver.  23,  since  it  re- 
turns to  his  present  circumstances,  but  introducing  a  new  thought  in 
contrast  with  the  hope  expressed  in  ver.  24. — I  go  unto  Jerusalem 
(am  on  the  point  of  doing  so),  ministering  unto  the  saints.  How 
is  afterwards  explained.  The  present  participle  indicates  that  the 
journey  is  part  of  the  ministering.     On  this  service,  see  2  Cor.  9  :   1, 

2  ;  Acts.  24  :  27. 

Ver.  26.  For  it  hath  been  the  good  pleasure  of  Macedo- 
nia and  Achaia.  Personification  for  the  Christians  iu  these  pro- 
vinces ;  the  latter  included  Greece  proper. — A  certain  contribu- 
tion. The  Greek  word  means  '  fellowship,'  '  communion,'  and  is 
allied  with  'communicate'  (Gal.  6:  G).  No  contribution  belongs  to 
Christian  charity,  unless  it  is  willingly  bestowed  and  as  a  matter  of 
fellowship.— For  the  poor  among'the  saints  that  are  at  Jeru- 
salem. Community  of  goods  evidently  did  not  exist  in  the  church  of 
Jerusalem.  Tie  number  of  poor  saints  there  need  occasion  little  sur- 
prise. 

Ver.  27.  Yea,  it  hath  been,  etc.  The  Apostle  emphasizes  by 
the  repetition  the  willingness  of  the  Grecian  Christians,  but  adds  an- 
other statement  to  mark  the  reasonableness  of  such  contributions  : 
and  their  debtors  they  are  ;  such  gifts  were  a  matter  of  repay- 
ment.—They  owe  it  to  them  also  to  minister,  etc.  The  word 
'  minister '  is  that  used  of  priestly  service  (comp.  *  minister  of  Christ 
Jesus ;'  ver.  16),  not  that  found  in  ver.  25.     To  such  priestly  service 


15:  28-30.]  ROMANS  XV.  241 

28  things.  When  therefore  I  have  accomplished  this, 
and  have  sealed  to  them  this  fruit,  I  will  go  on  by 

29  you  unto  Spain.  And  I  know  that,  when  I  come 
unto  you,  I  shall  come  in  the  fulness  of  the  blessing 
of  Christ. 

30  Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  by  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  by  the  love  of  the  Spirit,  that  ye  strive  to- 

belongs  the  privilege  and  duty  of  providing  for  the  poor  saints.  This 
thought  is  the  more  emphatic,  in  view  of  the  antithesis  between  spi- 
ritual things  and  carnal  things  ;  the  former  referring  to  the  gifts 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  wtiich  came  to  the  Gentiles  from  the  mother  church  at 
Jerusalem  (corap.  Acts  11  :  20) ;  the  latter  including  those  things  which 
pertain  to  the  external,  matei'ial,  side  of  man's  nature.  The  reference 
to  the  Holy  Spirit  does  not  require  the  ethical  sense  in  this  contrast, 
though  the  reverse  is  true. 

Ver.  28.  When  therefore,  etc.  Reverting  to  the  hope  ex- 
pressed in  ver.  24. — Have  sealed  to  them  this  fruit.  Secured 
to  them  as  their  property  the  '  fruit,'  the  produce,  of  this  contribu- 
tion. Some  take  *  sealed '  in  a  literal  sense,  but  this  seems  out  of 
keeping  with  the  tone  of  the  passage.  '  The  Apostle  is  moved  by  the 
thought  that  with  the  close  of  the  work  of  love  to  which  he  refers  he 
was  to  finish  his  great  and  long  labors  in  the  East,  and  was  to  take  in 
hand  a  new  field  in  the  far  West.  In  these  circumstances  an  unusual 
thoughtful  expression  for  the  concluding  act  offers  itself  naturally,' 
(Meyer.) — I  will  go  on  by  you  unto  Spain.  The  full  idea  of  the 
original  is:  I  will  depart  (or,  return)  from  .Jerusalem,  pass  through 
your  city,  and  go  unto  Spain.  From  Spain  the  way  was  discovered, 
after  many  centuries,  to  a  farther  West. 

Ver.  29.  And  I  know  that,  etc.  The  Apostle's  humility  did 
not  prevent  him  from  knowing  this  and  writing  of  it.  More  confi- 
dence of  this  /i;?>ic?  would  promote  humility  in  the  preacher. — In  the 
fulness  of  the  blessing  of  Christ.  'Of  the  gospel'  is  a  gloss, 
to  be  rejected  on  decisive  authority.  Christ's  blessing  in  abundance 
he  knew  would  attend  him  at  Rome. 

Ver.  30.  Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren.  This  fervent  exhor- 
tation is  the  natural  expression  of  his  confidence  in  them  and  of  the 
anticipation  he  has  respecting  what  awaits  him  at  Jerusalem  (corap. 
Acts  20 :  22  ;  21 :  10,  etc  ). — iBy  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  by 
the  love  of  the  Spirit.  *  For'  is  incorrect  in  both  cases  ;  '  through  ' 
is  the  literal  sense,  with  the  same  force  as  in  chap.  12 :  1,  presenting 
a  motive.  '  Love  of  the  Spirit'  is  that  afiFection  wrought  by  the  Ploly 
Spirit.  Between  Paul  and  the  mass  of  his  readers  personally  unknown 
to  him,  only  such  a  love  could  be  urged  as  a  motive.  It  is  more  ex- 
tended than  personal  affection. — That  ye  strive  together  -with 
me  ft  he  figure  is  that  of  a  contest  in  the  games)  in  your  prayers, 
16 


242  ROMANS  XV.  [15 :  31-33. 

31  gether  with  me  in  your  prayers  to  God  for  me ;  that  I 
may  be  delivered  from  them  that  are  disobedient  in 
Judsea,  and  that  my  ministration  which  I  have  for  Je- 

32  rusalem  may  be  acceptable  to  the  saints ;   that  I   may 
come  unto  you  in  joy  through  the  will  of  God,  and  to- 
ss gether  with  you  find  rest.     Now  the  God  of  peace  be 

with  you  all.     Amen. 

etc.  'Your'  brings  out  the  force  of  the  article  ;  the  possessive  pro- 
noun, though  found  in  some  authorities,  must  be  rejected. 

Ver,  31.  That,  etc.  The  purpose  and  purport  of  the  prayer, — 
That  are  disobedient;  comp.  chap.  11 :  30.  The  word  may  mean 
*  unbelieving,'  and  in  any  case  the  two  senses  are  closely  related,  but 
the  unbelief  of  the  Jews  is  here  regarded  as  disobedience  to  the  gos- 
pel.— And  that  my  ministration  (of  alms)  .  .  .  may  be  ac- 
ceptable (the  same  word  as  in  ver.  16)  to  the  saints.  Besides  the 
hostility  of  the  Jews,  he  must  encounter  the  doubts  of  the  Jewish 
Christians,  whom  he  however' calls  'saints.' 

Ver.  32.  That  I  may  come  unto  you  in  joy  (the  emphasis 
rests  on  this  phrase)  through  the  will  of  God  (there  is  considera- 
ble variation  in  the  manuscripts,  but  this  seems  the  best  established 
reading),  and  together  with  you  find  rest  (some  authorities  omit 
the  last  clause).  The  reality  was  entirely  different  from  this  hope  and 
prayer;  but  we  cannot  doubt  that  the  Apostle's  arrival  at  Rome  was 
'  in  joy,'  even  though  in  bonds,  since  in  all  he  submitted  himself  to  the 
will  of  God. 

Ver.  33.  Now  the  God  of  peace,  etc.  A  benediction  was 
natural,  and  the  anticipated  conflicts  might  well  lead  him  to  speak  of 
God  as  '  the  God  of  peace.' 

2.    Greetings  to  Different  Persons  at  Rome,  16  :  1-16. 

The  bearer  of  the  letter  is  commended  in  vers.  1,  2.  Then  follow  greetings  to  many 
individuals,  and  to  some  households  or  household  churches.  About  one-third  of  the 
persons  mentioned  are  women.  On  the  names  as  indicative  of  origin  and  station  of 
the  believers  at  Rome,  see  Introd.,  g  1.  Of  this  chapter,  Chrysostom  says :  '  It  is  pos- 
sible even  from  bare  names  to  find  a  treasure.'  The  list  shows:  (1.)  Paul's  personal 
regard  ;  (2.)  The  high  place  he  accords  to  women ;  (3.)  The  constitution  of  the  Roman 
congregation ;  (4.)  The  great  influence  he  exerted,  since  so  many  friends  were  present 
in  a  place  he  had  never  visited ;  (5.)  The  undying  name  received  from  his  friendly 
mention,  is  a  type  of  the  eternal  blessing  which  belongs  to  those  whose  names  are 
written  in  the  Lamb's  book  of  life.  Classic  authors  have  not  preserved  for  us  the 
record  of  so  many  friends ;  the  mention  of  their  friends  has  not  awakened  so  great  an 
interest  as  this  list  of  humble  people  whom  they  would  have  despised.  Bishop  Light- 
foot  {Philipjnans,  pp.  1C9-176)  finds  that  most  of  the  names  occurring  in  this  chapter 
occur  also  in  the  inscriptions  discovered  in  recently  excavated  burial  places  at  Rome 


16:1,2.]  ROMANS  XVI.  243 

Chapter  16:  1-16. 
-  Greetings  to  Different  Persons  at  Rome, 

1  I  comraend  unto  you  Phoebe  our  sister,  who  is  a 

2  ^  servant  of  the  church  that  is  at  Cenchrese :  that  ye 
receive  her  in  the  Lord,  worthily  of  the  saints,  and 
that  ye  assist  her  in  whatsoever  matter  she  may  have 
need  of  you :  for  she  herself  also  hath  been  a  suc- 
courer  of  many,  and  of  mine  own  self. 

1  Or,  deaconess. 

{columbaria).  These  inscriptions  refer  mainly  to  freeclmen  and  slaves  of  emperors,  and 
it  is  a  fair  inference  that  some  of  the  imperial  household  are  included  here  (comp. 
Phil,  4 :  22).  Identification  of  the  persons  is  of  course  impossihlo.  The  names  are 
mainly  Greek  ('  Mary '  aluue  is  Jewish),  hut  this  gives  no  clue  to  the  nationality,  since 
Greek  names  were  borne  by  the  Hellenistic  Jews.  We  may  suppose  that  many  of  those 
saluted  here  were  of  Jewish  extraction ;  proportionally  more  than  in  the  Eoman  con- 
gregation as  a  whole 

Yer.  1.  I  commend,  etc.  Both  an  introduction  and  a  commen- 
dation are  suggested. — Fhcebe  our  sister;  aCliristian  believer;  this 
is  the  general  ground  for  receiving  her. — "Who  is  a  servant,  or, 
'  deaconess,'  etc.  This  is  the  special  reason,  in  view  of  the  fidelity 
with  which  she  had  fulfilled  her  duty  (ver.  2).  It  is  implied  that  she 
occupied  this  position  at  the  time  Paul  wrote.  The  word  here  used 
may  mean  'servant,'  but  it  is  unlikely  that  this  is  the  sense,  since 
there  were  deaconesses  in  the  Christian  church  during  the  first  cen- 
tury, their  duty  being  to  take  care  of  the  sick  and  poor,  and  of 
strangers,  in  the  female  portion  of  the  churches.  The  rigid  separation 
of  the  sexes  made  this  the  more  necessary.  The  custom  continued  for 
centuries  in  the  Greek  church.  In  the  Protestant  church  the  ofiice  of 
deaconess  has  recently  been  revived.  The  Ptoman  Catholic  Church  has, 
as  is  well  known,  special  orders  of  celibate  women  to  perform  the  duties 
properly  belonging  to  this  ofiice.  The  term  here  used  may  be  either 
masculine  or  feminine.  Some  regard  the  '  widows '  spoken  of  in  1 
Tim.  5 :  3-16  as  deaconesses,  a  view  opposed  by  Neauder  ;  see  SchafF, 
Apostolic^hurch,  p.  535,  where  the  identity  is  defended.  Phoebe  was 
the  bearer  of  the  letter,  else  no  such  special  mention  would  have  been 
necessary.  From  the  independent  manner  of  her  movements,  it  has 
been  inferred  that  she  was  a  widow. — Cenchreae.  The  eastern  port 
of  Corinth,  about  nine  English  miles  from  that  city.  To  argue  from 
this  that  the  letter  was  addressed  to  Ephesus,  or  some  church  east  of 
Corinth,  is  puerile. 

Ver.  2.  That  ye  receive  her  in  the  Lord.  This  is  the  purpose 
of  the  commendation,  that  the  Roman  believers  give  her  a  Christian 


2U  ROMANS  XVI.  [15 :  3, 4. 

3  Salute   Prisca  and  Aquila   my  fellow-workers   in 

4  Christ  Jesus,  who   for   my  life  laid  down  their  own 
necks :  unto  Avhom  not  only  I  give  thanks,  but  also 

welcome. — Worthily  of  the  saints,  as  saints  ought  to  receive  such 
an  one. — The  Greek  adverb  is  uniformly  rendered  '  worthily '  in  the 
R.  V.  (comp.  Phil.  3 :  27). — And  that  ye  assist  her,  etc.  The  term 
used  is  a  legal  one,  and  hence  it  has  been  inferred  that  her  visit  to 
Rome  was  on  private  legal  Business.  It  is  unlikely  that  she  was 
traveling  in  the  discharge  of  her  otficial  duty  as  deaconess. — For  she 
also  herself  hath  been  a  succourer  of  many.  The  word  used  is 
an  honorable  one,  indicating  service  bestowed  by  a  superior  on  in- 
feriors (patroness).  It  suggests  here  her  labors  as  deaconess,  though 
it  may  include  private  service. — Of  mine  own  self.  Where  is 
unknown  ;  possibly  Paul  had  once  been  ill  during  a  visit  to  Cenchreoe, 
or  the  Apostle  may  have  made  her  house  his  home,  as  in  the  case  of 
Lydia,  at  Philippi.  This  commendation  has  the  true  Christian  tone ; 
what  she  has  done  for  other  Christians  gives  her  a  claim  on  the  help- 
fulness of  the  Roman  believers. 

Ver.  3.  Salute.  *  Greet'  (A.  V.)  and  '  salute'  represent  the  same 
word  throughout  the  chapter. — Prisca  and  Aquila.  'Priscilla'  is 
the  diminutive  form,  found  elsewhere  and  in  the  versions  and  Fathers. 
The  wife  seems  to  have  been  the  more  prominent  and  active  Christian ; 
her  name  comes  first  in  Acts  18  :  2,  as  well  as  here.  Then  as  now, 
capacity  and  fidelity  formed  the  standard.  '  This  married  couple,  tent- 
makers  like  Paul  (Acts  18:  3),  expellel  from  Rome  as  Jews  under 
Claudius,  had  been  convertei  at  Corinth  by  Paul  (see  on  Acts  18:  1), 
had  then  migrated  to  Ephesus  (Acts  18:  18,  26;  1  Cor.  16:  19),  are- 
Jiow  again  in  Rome  ;  but,  according  to  2  Tim.  4  :  19,  were  at  a  later 
period  once  m^re  in  Ephesus'  (Meyer).  Their  stay  at  Ephesus  has 
been  made  the  basis  of  th^  theory  that  this  chapter  (or  Epistle)  was 
originally  addressed  to  that  city  ;  but  persons  of  their  trade  would  be 
apt  to  travel  extensively. — Fellow  workers  (so  A.  V.  in  Col.  4:11) 
in  Christ  Jesus.  They  had  wrought  togetlier  at  their  common 
han  licraft,  but  this  refers  to  working  for  Christ,  in  Him  as  the  sphere 
of  activity.  On  the  question  whether  '  Prisca'  publicly  preached, 
comp.  the  Epistle  addressed  to  the  church  where  she  first  labored  for 
Christ  (1  Cor.  14:  34). 

Ver.  4,  Who  for  ('  in  behalf  of,'  not,  'instead  of)  my  life  laid 
down,  etc.  Lit.,  '  laid  under,'  used  of  submitting  to  execution. 
Th  It  they  underwent  peril  of  their  life  for  the  sake  of  Paul  is  clearly 
meant  whether  at  Ephesus  or  Corinth  is  uncertain,  since  in  both 
places  Paul  had  been  exposed  to  violence.  But  the  mention  of  this 
fact  opposes  the  Ephesian  destination  of  the  chapter. —All  the 
churches  of  the  Gentiles  ;  evidently  including  the  Roman  con- 
gregation. The  Gentile  churches  owed  gratitude  for  what  was  done 
in  behalf  of  the  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles. 


16 :  5-7.]  ROMANS  XVI.  245 

5  all  the  churches  of  the  Gentiles :  and  salute  the  church 
that  is  in  their  house.     Salute  Epsenetus  my  beloved, 

6  who  is  the  firstfruits   of  Asia   unto  Christ.     Salute 

7  iMary,  who   bestowed  much   labour  on  you.     Salute 
Andronicus  and  ^  Junias,  my  kinsmen,  and  my  fellow- 

1  Or,  Junia. 

Ver.  5.  And  salute  ;  the  verb  is  properly  supplied,  but  the  clause 
is  grammatically  connected  with  ver.  3,  and  should  form  a  part  of  ver. 
4. — The  church  that  is  in  their  house.  The  early  Christians 
had,  as  a  rule,  no  public  place  of  assembly,  but  probably  met  in  the 
houses  of  the  more  pi'ominent  brethren.  In  larger  cities  there  seem 
to  have  been  several  such  places  of  meeting ;  and  one  of  these  is  here 
referred  to.  The  language  of  Justin  Martyr  sustains  this  view. 
The  same  persons  were  doubtless  wont  to  gather  there,  forming  a 
household  parish  of  the  one  Roman  congregation.  As  the  city  was 
four  miles  in  circumference,  there  waa  a  necessity  for  a  number 
of  these  assemblies. — Epaenetus  my  beloved.  All  the  persons 
named,  from  this  point  to  the  close  of  the  section,  are  unknown.  'The 
legends  of  the  Fathers  made  the  most  of  them  martyrs  and  bishops, 
and  the  Synopsis  of  Dorotheus  misplaces  the  most  of  them  among  the 
seventy  disciples'  (Meyer). — The  first-fruits  of  Asia  unto 
Christ;  /.  e.,  among  the  first  converts  in  the  Roman  province  of 
Asia,  of  which  Ephesus  was  the  chief  city.  Comp.  1  Cor.  16  :  15, 
where  the  same  expression  occurs.  There  *  Achaia'  is  the  correct 
reading;  here  'Asia'  is  much  better  supported.  The  change  may  have 
arisen  from  the  fact  that  this  Epistle  was  written  in  Corinth,  the  capi- 
tal city  of  Achaia. 

Yer.  6,  Salute  Mary.  This  is  the  sixth  person  of  this  name 
mentioned  in  the  New  Testament.  Otherwise  unknown,  but  charac- 
terized as  one  who  bestowed  much  labor  on  you.  So  the  best 
authorities  and  most  recent  editors.  '  Bestowed  labor '  points  to  prac- 
tical activity,  in  charity  and  womanly  ministrations.  When  preach- 
ing and  teaching  are  meant,  '  in  the  word  '  is  usually  added. 

Ver.  7.  Andronicus  and  Junias,  or,  '  Junia.'  It  is  impossible 
to  decide  which  form  of  the  latter  name  is  correct;  if  the  feminine 
form  ('.Junia')  be  accepted,  then  the  wife  or  sister  of  Andronicus 
is  meant.  But  the  description  is  supposed  by  many  commentators  to 
favor  the  reference  to  a  man. — My  kinsmen.  This  may  mean  '  fel- 
low-countrymen,' here  and  in  veis.  11,  21 ;  but  all  the  persons  thus 
termed  may  have  been  actual  '  kinsmen.'  It  cannot  be  affirmed  that 
they  were  not. — My  fello^w- prisoners.  When  and  where  is  un- 
known.— "Who  are  of  note  among  the  apostles  ;  honorably 
known  by  the  Apostles.  The  phrase  does  not  imply  that  they  were 
Apostles.  So  loose  a  sense  of  the  term  cannot  be  accepted  :  see  SchafF, 
Apostolic  Church,  pp.  512,  etc. — Who  alco  (?'.  e.,  the  two  persons 
named,  not  *  the  Apostles')  have  been  in  Christ  before  me.     Be- 


246  ROMANS  XVI.  [16:8-13. 

prisoners,  who  are  of  note  among  the  apostles,  who 

8  also  have  been  in  Christ  before  me.     Salute  Ampliatus 

9  my  beloved  in  the  Lord.     Salute  Urbanus  our  fellow- 

10  worker  in  Christ,  and   Stachys  my  beloved.     Salute 
Apelles  the  approved  in  Christ.     Salute  them  which 

11  are  of  the  household  of  Aristobulus.    Salute  Herodion 
my  kinsman.     Salute  them  of  the  household  of  Nar- 

12  cissus,  which  are  in  the  Lord.     Salute  Tryphaena  and 
Tryj^hosa,  who*  labour  in   the  Lord.     Salute  Persis 

13  the   beloved,  which  laboured  much  in  the  Lord.     Sa- 

came  Christians  before  the  conversion  of  Paul ;  probably  in  Judea, 
since  they  were  known  to  the  Apostles.  Paul  had  a  nephew  at  Jeru- 
salem, we  learn  from  Acts  23  :   16. 

Ver.  8.  Ampliatus ;  so  the  weightier  authorities  ;  '  Amplias '  is 
an  abbreviated  form.  'A  comrhon  name  in  itself,  it  occurs  several 
times  in  connection  with  the  imperial  household'  (Lighfoot).  The 
same  is  true  of  nearly  every  name  in  the  rest  of  the  section. — My 
beloved  in  the  Lord;  in  Christian  fellowship. 

Ver.  9.  Urbanus  (the  Latin  form  of  this  Latin  name)  our  fel- 
lo"W-worker  in  Christ.  '  Our '  refers  not  to  Paul  alone,  since  he 
says  'my'  so  frequently  here,  but  to  the  Koman  Christians  also. — 
Stachys  my  beloved.  The  variety  in  these  commendatory  phrases 
was  probably  due  to  specific  reasons. 

Ver.  10.  Apelles.  Not  to  be  confounded  with  'Apollos.'  The 
name  occurs  in  Horace  (Sat.,  i.  v.  100)  as  that  of  a  Jew.  He  may 
have  been  a  freedman,  as  some  suppose,  but  the  name  was  not  uncom- 
mon. There  are  various  conjectures  as  to  the  grouping  of  freedmen 
and  slaves  in  these  s&lutaiions. — The  approved  in  Christ;  one 
whose  Christian  steadfastness  had  been  tested. — Of  the  household 
of  Aristobulus;  the  Christians  in  that  household  (comp.  ver.  11), 
probaT^ly  slaves.  There  is  no  evidence  that  the  person  named  was  a 
believer ;  the  phrase  used  has  been  thought  by  some  to  indicate  that 
he  was  dead. 

Ver.  11.  Narcissus.  A  powerful  freedman  of  Claudius  bore  this 
name,  but  died  two  or  three  years  before  this  Epistle  was  written. 
Possibly  the  household  of  this  person  is  meant. 

Ver.  12.  The  three  persons  mentioned  in  this  verse  were  probably 
deaconesses. — Persis.  The  name  is  derived  from  Persia,  but  on  this 
fact  no  inference  can  be  based.  This  woman  is  not  only  distinguished 
by  the  mention  of  her  greater  labor,  but  is  called  the  beloved. 
Meyer  notices  the  delicacy  of  the  phrase;  not,  'my  beloved,'  as  in 
the  case  of  the  men  referred  to  in  vers.  5,  8. 

Ver.  13.  Rufus.  Possibly  the  person  mentioned  in  Mark  15:  21, 
since  Mark  probably  wrote  in  Pvome.     But  the  name  was^frequent. — 


16:  14-16.]  ROMANS  XVI.  247 

lute  Rufus  the  chosen  in  tlie  Lord,  and  his  mother 

li  and    mine.      Salute   Asyncritus,    Phlegon,    Hermes, 

Patrobas,  Hernias,  and   the  brethren   that  are  with 

15  them.     Salute  Philologus  and  Julia,  Xcreus  and  his 
sister,  and  Olympas,  and  all  the  saints  that  are  with 

16  them.     Salute  one  another  with  a  holy  kiss.     All  the 
churches  of  Christ  salute  you. 

The  ehosen  in  the  Lord ;  not  merely  '  elect  in  Christ,'  but  a 
chosen  distinguished  Christian  man.  —  His  mother  and  mine. 
'His  mother  by  nature,  mine  by  maternal  kindness'  (Webster  and 
Wilkinson).  The  peculiarly  aflectionate  tone  suggests  some  special 
kindness,  in  regard  to  which  we  can  only  conjecture.  If  she  were  the 
wife  of  Simon  of  Cyrene  and  had  lived  at  Jerusalem,  opportunities  to 
befriend  Paul  would  have  been  frequent. 

Ver.  14.  The  numerous  group  here  referred  to  was  probably  inti- 
mately associated,  and  less  known  to  the  Apostle. — Hermes,  Patro- 
bas, Hermas  is  the  order  of  the  best  authorities.  The  last  named 
person  can  scarcely  be  the  author  of  the  Shepherd  of  Hermas,  since 
that  work  was  probably  not  written  before  the  middle  of  the  second 
century. — The  brethren  that  are  -with  them.  Comp.  ver.  15. 
The  two  phrases  may  refer  to  household  churches,  or  to  associations  of 
Christians  for  business  purposes.  The  former  seems  more  probable. 
In  that  case  five  assemblies  are  indicated. 

Ver.  15.  Julia ;  probably  the  wife  of  Philologus. — Olympas  is 
the  name  of  a  man. — All  the  saints,  etc.  In  any  case  pointing  to  a 
numerous  body  of  Christians. 

Ver.  16.  Salute  one  another  with  a  holy  kiss.  'The  mean- 
ing of  this  injunction  seems  to  be,  that  the  Roman  Christians  should 
take  occasion,  on  the  receipt  of  the  Apostle's  greetings  to  them,  to  tes- 
tify their  mutual  love,  in  this,  the  ordinary  method  of  salutation,  but 
having  among  Christians  a  Christian  and  holy  meaning '  (Alford ),  The 
custom  is  still  known  in  the  Greek  Church. — All  the  churches  of 
Christ  salute  you.  The  word  *  all '  was  probably  omitted  by  the 
scribes,  because  the  expression  seemed  too  extensive.  But  Paul  was 
in  communication  with  most  Christian  churches  ;  all  such  would  feel 
interested  in  the  believers  at  Rome,  and  if,  as  is  probable,  his  inten- 
tion of  going  there  was  known,  many  salutations  would  be  intrusted 
to  him.  As  he  knew  so  well  the  believers  at  Rome  which  he  had  not 
visited,  how  well  qualified  he  was  to  speak  for  the  many  believing  as- 
semblies he  had  himself  organized. 


248  ROMANS  XVI.  [16:  17,  18. 

Chaptek  16:  17-24. 
Closing  Exhortation,  with  greetings  from  various  persons, 

17  Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren,  mark  them  which 
are  causing  the  divisions  and  occasions  of  stumbling, 
contrary  to  the  ^doctrine  which  ye  learned  :  and  turn 

18  away  from  them.  For  they  that  are  such  serve  not 
our  Lord  Christ,  but  their  own  belly ;  and  by  their 
smooth  and  fair  speech  they  beguile  the  hearts  of  the 

^  Or,  teaching. 

8.      Closing  Exhortation,  with  Greetings  from  various  persons,  vers.  17-24. 

The  warning  of  this  section  (vers.  17-20)  indicates,  not  the  presence  of  false  teach- 
ers at  Kome,  but  rather  the  danger  of  such  persons  making  their  appearance.  Tlie 
tone  of  the  warning  suggests  this,  as  well  as  the  fact  that  it  occurs  incidentally  in  a 
closing  paragraph,  instead  of  in  the  body  of  the  Epistle.  That  Jewish  zealots  for  the 
law  were  those  against  whom  the  Apostle  warns  is  the  most  probable  view.  The  de- 
Boription  of  ver.  18  is  plainly  applictible  to  these  Judaizers,  to  whom  the  weak  breth- 
ren would  afford  an  opportunity.  Vers.  21-24  form  a  distinct  paragraph.  Most  of  the 
names  are  found  in  the  Book  of  the  Acts,  but  the  persons  may  be  different,  except  in 
the  case  of  Timothy.  Attempts  have  been  made  to  prove  that  this  paragraph  was  not 
destined  for  Rome,  or  is  not  genuine,  but  there  is  nothing  whatever  in  the  passage 
itself  (certainly  not  in  the  warning  against  false  teachers)  to  confirm  either  of  these 
opinions.     (Comp.  Introduction,  §  5,  and  Excursus  at  the  close  of  this  chapter  ) 

Ver.  17.  "Novr  I  beseech  you,  brethren.  Comp.  chap.  15:  30. 
— Mark  them  ;  note  carefully.  In  Phil.  3:  17,  it  is  applied  to  those 
•who  are  to  be  imitated. — Them  -which  are  causing,  etc.  The  pres- 
ent tense  indicates  that  such  persons  were  doing  this,  but  not  necessa- 
rily at  Rome. — The  divisions  and  occasions  of  stumbling. 
The  article  (in  the  Greek)  points  to  known  matters.  The  two  Avords 
refer  to  divisions  in  churches  and  to  temptations  to  depart  from  the 
gospel  basis  of  faith  and  life.  Others,  with  less  renson.  apply  them 
to  doctrinal  divisions  and  moral  offences. — Contrary  to  the  doc- 
trine, or,  'teaching.'  The  former  rendering  may  mislead:  the  refer- 
ence is  to  the  entire  range  of  Christian  truth.  The  commendation  of 
their  teachers  implied  here  imlicates  that  the  church  was  founded 
mainly  by  Christians  of  the  Pauline  type. —  Turn  a^way  from  them. 
There  is  no  reference  to  official  excommunication,  but  to  a  rule  of  pri- 
vate conduct  toward  such.  The  other  might  follow,  but  that  was  for 
the  local  church  to  determine. 

Ver.  18.  For  they  that  are  such,  etc.  Comp.  Phil.  3:  18,  19. 
— Our  Lord  Christ ;  He  is  the  true  Master  (notice  the  unusual 
form,  which  is  supported  by  all  the   early  manuscripts),  yet  they  do 


16:  10,  20.]  ROMANS  XVI.  249 

19  innocent.  For  your  obedience  is  come  abroad  unto 
all  men.  I  rejoice  therefore  over  you  :  but  I  would 
have  you  Avise  unto  that  which   is  good,  and  simple 

20  unto  that  which  is  evil.  And  the  God  of  peace  shall 
bruise  Satan  under  your  feet  shortly. 

The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be  with  you. 

not  serve  Him,  but  their  o^A^n  belly  ;  a  figure  for  sensuality.  It  is 
remarkable  how  often  scliismatios,  have  proved  their  Epicureanism. — 
By  their  smooth  and  fair  speech;  lit.,  'by  the  kind  speaking 
and  blessing.'  These  terms  refer  either  to  the  tenor  and  force  of  their 
■word,  or  the  former  may  point  to  the  mark  of  kindliness,  and  the  lat- 
ter to  flattery.  Ihe  unctiousness  of  sensual  hypocrites  is  well  known. 
— Beguile  the  hearts  of  the  innocent ;  those  who  are  unsuspicious, 
unwary.  How  many  were  deceiving  and  deceived  appears  from  Phil. 
1  :  15,  written  from  Rome  a  few  years  after  this.  Undue  severity 
cannot  be  ascribed  to  the  Apostle's  language:  few  earnest  Christian 
teachers  have  failed  to  observe  how  apt  it  still  is. 

Ver.  19.  For  your  obedience,  etc.  '  Obedience'  to  the  gospel, 
obedience  of  faith,  is  meant,  as  throughout  the  Epistle.  (This  com- 
mendation does  not  necessarily  point  to  a  church  in  which  the  Apostle 
had  personally  labored,  as  Weiss  holds.)  Because  of  their  well-known 
obedience,  he  does  not  class  them  among  the  '  innocent.'  This  view  of 
*  for,'  as  implying  an  antithesis,  is  further  favored  by  the  next  clause. 
Other  views:  I  warn  you  thus,  because  your  obedient  disposition  is 
well  known.  The  former  gives  an  unusual  sense  to  '  obedience  ;  '  the 
latter  does  not  accord  well  with  the  force  of  'for'  and  '  therefore.' — 
I  rejoice  therefore  over  you  (the  better  supported  order  places 
the  emphasis  on  this  phrase) :  but  I  "would  have  you,  etc.  A 
delicate  combination  of  warning  with  the  expression  of  firm  confidence. 
Here  is  the  added  reason  for  the  exhortation  of  ver.  17. — "Wise  unto 
that  -which  is  good,  and  simple  unto  that  which  is  evil. 
'  Simple '  is  not  the  same  word  as  in  ver.  18 ;  it  might  be  rendered 
'harmless,'  as  the  margin  of  the  A.  V.,  since  it  denotes  'unmixed,' 
'  pure,'  '  free  from.'  '  Unto '  in  both  cases  points  to  the  result. 
Wisdom  is  needed  that  we  may  rightly  do  what  we  know  to  be  right; 
but  in  reerard  to  what  is  evil,  the  one  way  is  the  simple,  unmixed  way 
of  avoiding  it  altogether. 

Yer.  20.  And  the  God  of  peace  (so  designated  in  contrast  with 
those  who  cause  divisions,  ver.  17)  shall  bruise  Satan  (who  moves 
all  these  disturbing  teachers)  under  your  feet  shortly.  The  figure 
is  based  upon  Gen.  3:  15.  God  will  give  them  the  victory;  both 
agencies  will  be  employed.  '  Shortly  '  is  usually  taken  in  the  sense 
of  '  soon.'  '  The  preservation  of  primitive  Christianity  from  the  fatal 
errors  that  very  soon  assailed  it  is  one  of  the  most  striking  of  the 
gracious  providences  of  God  toward  His  church'  (Shedd).     ButGodet 


250  ROMANS  XVI.  [16:  21-23. 

21  Timothy    my    fellow-worker    saluteth    you ;    and 

22  Lucius  and  Jason  and  Sosipater,  my  kinsmen.  I  Ter- 
tius,  Hvho   write  the  epistle,  salute  you  in  the  Lord. 

23  Gains  my  host,  and  of  the  whole  church,  saluteth 
you.  Erastus  the  treasurer  of  the  city  saluteth  you, 
and  Quartus  the  brother.^ 

1  Or,  who  write  the  epistle  in  the  Lord,  salute  you. 

2  Some  ancient  authorities  insert  here  ver.  24  the  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  be 
with  you  all.    Amen,  and  omit  tlie  like  words  in  ver.  20. 

gives  it  the  sense  of  '  rapidly,'  as  better  supported  by  usage.  A  refer- 
ence to  the  return  of  Christ  is  by  no  means  necessarily  implied. — The 
grace  of  our  Lord,  etc.  This  benediction,  except  the  word  'Amen,' 
is  supported  by  the  oldest  authorities  (two  of  them  omitting  'Christ '), 
most  of  them,  however,  omitting  ver.  24  (see  below).  The  salutations 
which  follow  seem  to  have  been  added  after  the  Epistle  was  virtually 
ended. 

Ver.  21.  Timothy  my  fellow- worker  saluteth  you.  That 
Timothy  was  with  Paul  at  this  time  appears  from  Acts  20 :  4.  He  is 
named  here,  and  not,  as  in  other  cases,  at  the  beginning  of  the  Epis- 
tle, because  he  too  was  personally  unknown  to  the  Roman  congrega- 
tion.— Lucius.  Not  'Luke,'  but  possibly  'Lucius  of  Cyrene'  (Acts 
13:  1). — Jason.  This  may  refer  to  the  person  named  in  Acts  17:  5, 
as  a  resident  of  Thessalonica.  —  Sosipater.  The  same  name  as  '  So- 
pater'  (Acts  20:  4),  and  possibly  the  same  person.  All  three  names 
were  frequent. — My  kinsmen.  Comp.  vers.  7,  11.  Here  also  the 
term  probably  means  more  than  'countrymen.'  That  Paul's  relatives 
should  become  Christians,  and  be  associated  with  him,  is  probable 
enough. 

Ver.  22.  I  Tertius.  Otherwise  unknown ;  probably  an  Italian, 
though  some  have  sought  to  identify  him  with  Silas,  because  the  He- 
brew word  answering  to  Tertius  sounds  like  Silas. — Who  "write  the 
epistle.  '  Wrote '  is  more  literal,  but  '  write '  gives  the  sense  of  this 
epistolary  aorist.  Paul  seems  to  have  dictated  most  of  his  letters.  It 
was  natural  that  the  amanuensis,  as  a  Christian  brother,  would  send 
his  salutation  in  the  first  person.  In  ver.  23  the  dictation  is  resumed. 
— In  the  Lord.  It  is  more  natural  to  connect  this  with  'salute,' 
though  the  Greek  order  permits  it  to  be  joined  with  •  write.'  (So  R. 
V.  marg.) 

Ver.  23.  Gains  mine  host.  Paul  was  lodging  with  this  man,  as 
he  had  previously  done  with  Aquila  and  Justus  (Acts  18:  1-7).  The 
name  occurs  in  connection  with  Paul  in  1  Cor.  1 :  14  ;  Acts  19  :  29  ; 
20:  4.  The  same  person  is  probably  meant  in  the  first  instance,  pro- 
bably in  the  last,  and  possibly  in  all  three. — And  of  the  whole 
church.  This  may  mean  that  a  household  church  met  with  him,  or 
that  he  was  universal  in  his  hospitality  to  Christians. — Erastus  the 


16 :  25,  26.]  ROMANS  XVI.  251 

Chapter  16:  25-27. 
Concluding  Doxology, 

25  ^  Now  to  him  that  is  able  to  stablish  you  according 
to  my  gospel  and  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  ac- 
cording to  the  revelation  of  the  mystery  which  hath 

26  been  kept  in  silence  through  tunes  eternal,  but  now  Ls 

1  Some  ancient  authorities  omityers.  25-27.  Compare  the  end  of  ch.  xiv. 
treasurer  (lit.,  'steward')  of  the  city;  of  Corinth.  This  may  be 
the  person  mentioned  in  Acts  19  :  22  ;  2  Tim.  4:  20  ;  but  in  that  ease 
he  had  relinquished  his  office  before  that  time. — Quartus  the  bro- 
ther ;  some  Christian  brother,  known  to  the  believers  at  Rome,  but 
totally  unknown  to  us. 

Ver.  24.  This  verse  is  omitted  by  the  best  authorities.  The  repe- 
tition of  the  benediction  is  not  so  unexampled  as  to  have  given  offence 
to  the  early  transcribers,  while  it  might  readily  have  been  transfei-red 
from  ver.  20.  On  the  relation  of  this  question  to  that  of  the  doxology, 
see  Excursus,  p.  255. 

4.    Concluding  Doxology,  vers.  25-27. 

In  no  other  Epistle  does  the  Apostle  conclude  with  a  doxolor]y,  but  this  need  occa- 
sion no  difficulty.  The  passage  bears  every  internal  evidence  of  genuineness,  and  is 
exceedingly  appropriate.  '  As  a  final  complete  couclusion,  we  have  now  this  praising 
of  God.  rich  in  contents,  deep  in  feeling  (perhaps  added  by  the  Apostle's  own  hand\  in 
which  the  leading  ideas  contained  in  the  whole  Epistle,  as  they  had  already  found  in 
the  introduction  (chap.  1 :  1-5)  their  preluding  key-note,  and  again  in  chap.  11 :  33-36, 
their  preliminary  doxological  expression,  now  further  receive,  in  the  fullest  unison  of 
inspired  piety,  their  consecrated  outburst  for  the  ultimate  true  consecration  of  the 
whole '  (Meyer). 

Ver.  25.  Now  to  him,  etc.  This  is  the  usual  form  in  a  doxology ; 
'the  only  wise  God'  (ver.  27),  is  in  apposition  with  'Him,'  all  that 
intervenes  being  descriptive.  There  is,  howerer,  a  grammatical  diffi- 
culty, owing  to  the  change  of  construction  in  the  latter  part  of  ver.  27. 
The  phrase  on  which  all  that  precedes  logically  depends  ('be  the 
glory')  is  placed  in  a-dependent  relative  clause.  Some  have  thought 
that  in  beginning  the  Apostle  had  in  mind  another  form  of  expression 
than  a  doxology,  and  that  the  relative  in  ver.  27  refers  to  Christ,  while 
others  regard  the  relative  as  an  interpolation  (see  below). — That  is 
able  to  stablish  you.  This  particular  designation  of  God  is 
appropriate  in  this  Epistle. — According  to  my  gospel.  It  is 
difficult  to  determine  the  exact  sense  and  connection  of  this  phrase, 
but  it  seems  best  to  join  it  with  'stablish,'  with  the  sense  'in 
reference  to  my  gospel,'  that  you  may  remain  steadfastly  faithful  to 
the  teaching  I  have  set  forth.  Others  give  it  the  wider  sense  of  'in 
subordination  to  and  according  to  the  requirements  of  my  gospel '  (so 


252  ROMANS  XVI.  [16:   26. 

manifested,  and  ^by  the  scriptures  of  the   prophets, 
according  to  the  commandment  of  the  eternal  God,  is 

1  Gr.  through. 

Alford),  The  explanation  'through'  is  lexically  untenable. — And 
the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ.  This  is  closely  joined  with  the 
preceding  phrase,  and  is  probably  an  explanation  of  it ;  either  the 
preaching  concerning  Christ,  which  is  the  substance  of  his  gospel,  or 
the  preaching  which  Christ  causes  to  be  promulgated  through  him. 
'  Preacliing '  here  means  the  thing  preached,  and  the  former  explana- 
tion is  preferable,  since  it  follows  the  analogy  of  the  phrase  '  the  gospel 
of  Christ.'  '  The  Apostle  would  thus  efface  what  might  seem  too  per- 
sonal in  that  noun,  "according  to  my  gospel"  '  (Godet).  To  refer  the 
phrase  to  the  preaching  of  Christ  Himself  when  on  earth,  is  unwar- 
ranted.— According  to  the  revelation,  etc.  The  connection  of 
the  clause  here  introduced  has  been  explained  in  three  ways  :  1,  Co- 
ordinate with  'according  to  my  gospel,'  etc.,  and  thus  closely  connected 
with  '  stablish.'  2.  Explanatory  of  the  whole  preceding  statement, 
and  thus  defining  'able  to  stablish,'  etc,  3.  Explanatory  of  'my 
gospel  and  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ,'  connected  with  the  verbal 
idea  therein  implied.  The  last  seems  least  defensible  grammatically. 
Either  of  the  other  two  would  be  linguistically  correct,  but  it  is  more 
probable  that  'according  to'  here  has  the  same  sense  as  before.  We 
therefore  prefer  (1.),  which  gi^-es  us  another  designation  of  the  gospel, 
'  as  the  revelation  of  the  primitive  sacred  mystery'  (Meyer). — Of  the 
mystery.  The  article  is  wanting  in  the  Greek,  but  what  follows 
explains  'mystery'  as  the  specific  one  on  which  the  Apostle  delighted 
to  dwell.  On  the  word,  see  chap.  11  :  25,  but  especially  Eph.  1  :  9. 
Here,  as  in  Ephesians,  the  contents  of  this  mystery  are,  in  general, 
the  salvation  of  sinful  men,  decreed  from  eternity,  accomplished  by 
Christ,  proclaimed  through  the  gospel  to  all  men ;  hence  the  gospel  is 
the  revelation  of  the  mystery.  J  he  Apostle  in  such  expressions,  how- 
ever, seems  always  to  have  in  mind  the  extension  of  salvation  to  the 
Gentiles,  so  that  they  become  one  body  with  believing  Jews  (see  Eph. 
3:  3-9;  Col.  1 :  26).  But  the  view  we  take  of  the  connection  prevents 
our  limiting  the  reference  to  this  extension. — Hath  been  kept  in 
silence  through  times  eterdal.  The  thought  is  a  common  one  in 
the  Apostle's  writings.  '  Times  eternal '  include  all  the  ages  cf  human 
histor3%  but  also  plainly  suggest  that  eternal  past  when  God  formed 
His  counsels  of  redemption  (Eph.  1:4).  '  Since  the  world  began  '  (A. 
V.)  needlessly  limits  the  sense  to  the  period  since  the  creation. 

Ver.  26.  But  no"w  is  manifested.  The  emphasis  rests  on 
'  manifested  ;'  the  whole  thought  is  explanatory  of  the  '  revelation  of 
the  mystery,'  and  in  contrast  with  the  long  silence  just  spoken  of 
(ver.  25).  '  Now,'  as  usual,  refers  to  the  period  since  the  gospel  was 
preached.  '  Manifested '  suggests  the  revelation  of  the  mystery  made 
to  the  Apostles  (comp.  Eph.  3:5);  while  'is  made  known'  which  all 
the  rest  of  the  verse  qualifies,  points  to  the  publication  of  the  mystery 


16:   26.]  ROMANS  XVI.  253 

made  known  unto  all  the  nations  unto  obedience  ^of 

••  1  Or,  <o  the  faUh. 

through  preaching.  The  two  expressions,  however,  are  closely  united 
by  aiid  (in  the  original  a  conjunction  used  only  to  connect  similar 
things). — By  the  scriptures  of  the  prophets.  This  is  the  first 
of  four  qualifying  phrases  joined  with  '  is  made  known.'  These  point 
respectively  to  (1)  the  means,  (2)  the  cause,  (3)  the  objects,  and  (4)  the 
aim  of  this  publication.  In  the  original  the  order  of  (3)  and  (4)  is 
inverted,  to  give  that  emphasis  to  the  universality  of  the  proclamation 
which  befits  the  close  of  this  Epistle.  The  arrangement  of  these 
phrases  is  not  arbitrary.  '  The  scriptures  of  the  prophets '  were 
actually  the  means  employe!  in  the  universal  diffusion  of  the  gospel. 
(The  article  is  wanting.  Comp.  chap.  1:2.)  Until  they  were  fulfilled 
the  matter  was  still  a  mystery,  but  Christ  Himself,  as  well  as  His 
Apostles,  constantly  used  the  Old  Testament  to  teach  evangelical  truth. 
It  is  altogether  unnecessary  to  argue  from  this  reference  to  the  Old 
Testament  that  the  '  mystery '  spoken  of  is  exclusively  the  reception 
of  the  Gentiles.  The  entire  mystery  of  redemption  could  be  made 
known  through  the  Old  Testament,  when  once  it  had  been  manifested 
to  the  inspired  Apostles.  Godet  labors  to  prove  that  New  Testament 
prophetic  writings  are  here  meant,  but  such  a  sense  is  not  obvious. 
In  fact  the  statement  that  the  mystery  had  been  kept  in  silence  (ver. 
5)  seems  to  require  a  reference  to  the  Old  Testament;  otherwise  the 
Apostle  would  have  foiled  to  give  it  the  place  in  this  grand  passage 
which  it  has  everywhere  else  in  New  Testament  history  and  literature 
(see  again,  chap.  1 :  2). — According  to  the  commandment  of 
the  eternal  God.  The  reference  to  the  Scripture  naturally  suggests 
God  who  spake  through  the  prophets.  But  it  is  not  necessir}^  to  take 
this  phrase  as  subordinate  to  '  Scriptures '  ;  still  less  to  make  it  paral- 
lel with  'according  to'  in  ver.  25.  The  publication  of  the  gospel  was 
by  Apostles  who  were  fully  persuaded  that  the  same  God  who  spoke 
through  the  prophets  had  sent  them  by  specific  commandment :  comp. 
Matt.  28:  19,  20,  and  the  Apostle's  language  everywhere.  'Eternal' 
is  appropriately  used  here,  since  the  whole  passage  has  reference  to 
what  he  has  disposed  '  during  eternal  ages'  as  well  as  in  the  present. 
— Unto  all  the  nations.  '  Unto '  here  points  to  the  local  extension 
of  the  gospel;  it  was  made  known  so  as  to  reach  'all  the  nations.' 
(The  introduction  of  this  phrase  opposes  the  limitation  of  'mystery' 
to  the  fact  of  the  reception  of  the  Gentiles  ;  what  was  made  known 
unto  them  was  the  entire  gospel  mystery).  The  universal  scope  of  the 
gospel  has  been  the  grounolltone  of  the  whole  epistle ;  hence  this 
phrase  stands  last  in  the  original,  to  give  it  due  emphasis. — Unto 
obedience  of  faith.  Precisely  as  iiTchap.  1:5:  'in  order  to  pro- 
duce obedience  to  faith,'  to  make  men  become  believers.  (Here  also 
'the  foith'  is  misleading.)  The  gospel  was  made  known :  by  Divine 
authority,  through  recorded  prophecy  now  fulfilled,  in  order  to  make 
men  believe,  and  extended  to  all  the  nations:     In  the  mystery  thus 


254  ROMANS  XVI.  [16:  27, 

27  faith ;  to  the  only  wise  God,  through  Jesus  Christ, 
Ho  whom  be  the  glory  ^for  ever.     Amen.,, 

1  Some  ancient  authorities  omit  to  whom.  2  (5r_  uj,<o  (fig  ages. 

made  known,  which  was  really  the  Apostle's  gospel,  God  was  able  to 
stablish  them.  Beginning  with  the  form  of  a  doxology  to  this  God  of 
powerful  helpfulness,  he  has  so  enlarged  upon  the  method  of  His  help 
as  to  render  a  resumption  necessary  ;  see  next  verse. 

Ver.  27.  To  the  only  wise  God,  etc.  The  construction  pre- 
sents a  grammatical  dtfficulty.  Efforts  have  been  made  to  avoid 
it  by  rejecting  to  "whom ;  but  a  due  regard  for  external  authori- 
ties will  not  permit  this.  We  regard  the  opening  phrase  as  a 
resumption  of  the  doxology  begun  in  ver.  2-3,  and  the  relative  as  an 
irregular  construction.  The  difficult  question  still  remains :  does  '  to 
whom'  refer  to  'the  only  wise  God,'  or  to  'Jesus  Christ?'  Explana- 
tions: 1.  It  refers  to  God.  This  is  grammatically  most  probable,  since 
otherwise  the  entire  passage  is  left  without  any  logical  form.  A  change 
of  construction  is  common  enough  in  Paul's  writings  ;  but  we  can  hardly 
accept  a  logically  incomplete  doxology.  *  Through  .Jesus  Christ '  may  then 
be  explained  as  meaning  tliat  God  through  Christ  appears  as  the  abso- 
lutely wise  God  (Meyer).  This  view  of  the  A.  V.  (and  many  older  ver- 
sions and  commentators),  which  joins  'through  .Jesus  Christ'  with  'be 
the  glory,'  is  opposed  by  the  presence  of  the  relative.  2.  Many  refer 
the  doxology  to  Christ.  The  Apostle  might  utter  such  a  doxology,  but  it 
seems  harsh  to  turn  the  reference  from  the  leading  Person  in  the 
entire  passage.  3.  Godet  refers  the  relative  to  both  God  and  Christ, 
urging  that  it  is  difficult  to  sepai-ate  them  in  a  passage  like  this.  In 
chap.  1  :  7,  'the  two  substantives  are  placed  under  the  government  of 
one  and  the  same  preposition  ;  they  might  therefore  here  be  included 
in  the  same  pronoun.'  But  such  interpretation  is  precarious.  The 
view  of  Meyer  seems  preferable. — Be  the  glory  forever.  '  The 
glory,'  which  befits  Him  (see  chap.  11  :  36).  'Be'  is  properly  sup- 
plied, rather  than  'is.'  The  latter  would  give  a  true  sense,  but  this  is 
an  ascription  of  praise.  The  Apostle,  who  had  dived  so  deeply  into 
the  riches  of  the  knowledge  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus,  might  well  close 
such  an  Epistle  by  declaring  that  God  was  revealed  as  absolutely  wise 
through  Jesus  Christ,  and  ascribe  to  Him,  as  such,  the  glory  forever. 
And  when,  through  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  this 
gospel,  the  mystery  of  God's  love  in  Jesus  Christ  shall  be  made  known 
unto  all  the  nations,  and  they,  through  the  written  revelation,  become 
obedient  to  faith  ;  then  to  Him  at  whos^command  the  message  is  pro- 
claimed, and  who  is- therein  revealed  as  the  only  wise  God,  to  Him  be 
the  glory  forever. — Amen.  They  only  say  'Amen'  who  labor  for 
and  await  the  final  triumph  of  Him  whose  plan  of  saving  grace  is  so 
fully  set  forth  in  this  great  Epistle.  The  subscription  found  in  the 
A.  V.  is  omitted  in  the  R.  V.  (so  in  all  the  Epistles).  In  this  case  it  is 
correct,  though  of  couisse  not  genuine,  since  none  of  the  older  authori- 
ties (before  the  ninth  century)  give  this  form. 


EXCURSUS  ON  CHAPTERS  15,  16.         255 


Excursus  on  Chapters  15,  16. 

As  already  stated  in  the  Introduction,  the  integrity  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans 
has  been  frequently  discussed ;  some  rejecting  chaps.  15,  16  as  un-Pauline,  others  de- 
nying their  place  in  this  Epistle.  The  main  reason  for  such  discussions  is  found  in 
the  peculiar  phenomena  discoverable  in  early  manuscripts  respecting  the  place  of  the 
concluding  doxology. 

I.  The  Textual  Phenomena.  (1.)  The  doxologj'  is  found  at  the  close  of  chap. 
16:  in  Aleph  B,  C,  D.  (four  of  the  five  earliest  Greek  manuscrijits),  in  the  Peshito 
Vulgate  and  other  versions,  and  in  some  Fathers.  All  recent  critical  editors  accept 
this  position.  (2.)  The  verses  stand  immediately  after  chap.  14  :  23,  in  L,  most  of  the 
cursive  Greek  manuscripts,  in  several  versious,  and  in  six  important  Greek  fathers. 
This  position  was  accepted  by  some  textual  ciitics  of  the  last  century,  and  usually  by 
those  authors  who  deny  the  integrity  of  the  Epistle.  (3)  In  A  and  a  few  cursives 
the  doxology  occurs  in  both  places.  That  it  was  repeated  in  the  original  letter  is  very 
improbable  ;  but  the  existence  of  this  repetiti  m  in  so  old  a  manuscript  as  A  (fifth 
century),  shows  an  early  doubt  as  to  the  true  position.  (4.)  A  later  corrector  of  D, 
usually  known  as  D^,  marked  these  verses  for  erasure ;  in  F  and  G  they  do  not  occur, 
but  a  space  has  been  left  blank  in  chap.  14  (not  exactly  at  the  same  point),  as  if 
with  the  design  of  inserting  them.  Marcion  rejects  them,  and  Jerome  found  a  few- 
manuscripts  which  omitted  them.     (5.)  No  authorities  omitchai-s.  15, 16. 

II.  The  Gexvinexess  of  the  Doxology.  The  variation  in  position  calls  for  a 
satisfactory  explanation,  but  it  is  least  of  all  accounted  for  by  denying  the  genuine- 
ness of  these  verses.  The  manuscript  authority  is  overwhelming,  and  the  internal 
evidence  very  strong.  Although  Paul's  doxologies  are  usually  simple,  at  the  close 
of  this  Epistle  such  a  sentence  as  this  need  occasion  no  surprise.  Moreover  the  expres- 
sions are  Patiline  and  the  style  precisely  that  which  is  found  in  passages  where  ho 
writes  with  his  own  hand.     This  he  probably  did  in  the  case  of  this  doxology. 

III.  The  Genctnenfps  of  Chaps.  15.  16.  In  the  case  of  so  long  a  passnge,  con- 
taining so  many  personal  details,  the  burdsn  of  proof  rests  with  those  who  deny  the 
genuineness.  Hence  few  critics  have  been  bold  enough  to  take  a  decided  position 
against  the  Pauline  authorship  of  the  chapters.  (Baur  is  one  of  the  few.)  We  may 
regard  the  genuineness  as  now  universally  accepted. 

IV.  The  Destination  of  these  Chapters.  Here  also  the  burden  of  proof  rests 
with  those  who  deny  the  place  of  the  chapters  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans. 

I.  The  Roman  Destivation.  The  usual  view  is,  that  the  Epistle  was  written  origi- 
nally and  sent  to  Rome  in  the  full  form,  and  that  the  doxology  was  displaced  in  some 
later  copies.  This  disiilacemf^nt  may  have  been  due  to  the  habit  of  copying  the  Epis- 
tles for  public  reading,  the  final  chapters  being  omitted,  as  less  suitable  for  this  pur- 
pose in  all  the  churches.  It  is  objected  that  all  the  ancient  lectionaries  contain  these 
chapters.  *  But  the  epoch  when  the  omission  of  these  two  chapters  would  have  taken 
place  is  much  earlier  than  the  date  of  the  collection  of  the  pericopes  which  have 
been  preserved  for  us '  (Godet).  Other  reasons  have  been  assigned  for  the  position  of 
the  doxology  at  the  close  of  chap.  14,  by  those  who  accept  the  Roman  destination  of 
the  concluding  chapters.  The  theory  of  Bishop  Lightfoot,  which  is  given  in  the  In- 
troduction, is  the  most  plausible  one,  though  it  seems  to  place  too  early  the  briefer 
form  of  the  Epistle. 


256  EXCURSUS  ON  CHAPTER  16. 

'  2.  The  t%on-Boman  Distinction.  Here  a  number  of  conflicting  theories  have  been 
suggested.  The  view  of  Renan  makes  of  these  chapters  a  patch- work  collection  of  the 
various  personal  and  local  items  written  by  the  Apostle,  but  for  different  churches  to 
which  the  Epistle  was  sent  as  an  encyclical  letter.  Seniler,  Paulus,  and  many  others, 
had  previously  suggested  this  composite  character.  Admitting  this  theory,  we  give  to 
each  critic  the  liberty  of  dissecting  the  chapters  and  exercising  his  ingenuity  in  dis- 
posing of  the  disjecta  membra.  '  Among  all  the  reasons  which  are  adduced  in  support 
of  these  different  opinions,  none  hold  good,  not  even  those  which  seem  least  founded 
upon  mere  arbitrariness  '  tJIeyer).  ISIost  of  tliese  theories,  h  Avever,  agree  in  desig- 
nating Ephesus  as  the  place  for  which  these  salutations  (in  whole  or  in  part),  were 
destined  assuming  that  Aquila  and  Priscilla  could  not  have  been  at  Rome  when  this 
Epistle  was  written,  but  probab'y  were  at  Ephesus.  It  is  a  pure  assumption.  In 
their  zeal  for  the  gospel,  these  two  could  as  readily  go  from  Ephesus  to  Rome  as  they 
had  gone  from  Corinth  to  Ephesus  (Acts  18:  18,  19; ;  especially  as  they  had  previously 
resided  in  Italy  (Acts  IS  :  2).  The  further  assumption  that  Paul  could  not  have  had 
80  many  acquaintances  in  Rome,  but  would  send  greetings  to  many  in  Ephesus, 
scarcely  deserves  an  answer.  The  movements  among  the  early  Christians  was  very 
great.  The  classes  to  which  they  belongfd  were  great  travellers.  Every  hint  we 
have  of  the  social  life  of  the  early  Church  sustains  the  probability  that  the  Apostle 
did  know  many  Christians  at  Rome  before  he  visited  that  city.  The  fact  that  he 
wrote  his  longest  Epistle  to  the  congregation  there  is  of  itself  a  proof  that  personal 
ties  were  not  wanting.  Here  we  may  revert  azain  to  the  list  of  names  in  chap.  16  : 
1-16.  Bishop  Lightfoot's  comparison  with  the  inscriptions  in  the  excavated  colim- 
baria  shows  '  that  the  names  and  allusions  at  the  close  of  the  Roman  Epistle  are  in 
keeping  with  the  circumstances  of  the  metropolis  in  St.  Paul's  day.'  We  therefore 
accept  the  integrity  of  the  Epistle  as  one  addressed  to  the  Romans.  This  is  the  only 
solution  of  the  whole  question  wliich  has  positive  evidence  to  support  it,  and  it  agrees 
best  with  all  the  phenomena,  external  and  internal,  which  enter  into  the  discussion. 


THEBEGINNINGSOFHISTORY 

According  to  the  Bible  and  the  Traditions  of  the  Oriental  Peoples.  From 
the  Creation  of  Man  to  the  Deluge.  By  Francois  Lenormant, 
Professor  of  Archoeology  at  the  ISJational  Library  of  France,  etc. 
(Translated  from  the  Second  French  Edition).  "With  an  introduction 
by  Francis  Brown,  Associate  Professor  in  Biblical  Philology, 
Union  Theological  Seminary. 


$2.50, 


"  What  should  we  see  in  the  first  chapters  of  Genesis  ?  "  writes  M.  Lenor- 
mant in  his  preface— "A  revealed  narrative,  or  a  human  tradition,  gathered 
up  for  preservation  by  inspired  writers  as  the  oldest  memory  of  their  race  ? 
This  is  the  problem  which  I  have  been  led  to  examine  by  comparing  the  nar- 
rative of  the  Bible  with  those  which  were  current  among  the  civilized  peo- 
ples of  most  ancient  origin  by  which  Israel  was  surrounded,  and  from  the 
midst  of  which  it  came." 

The  book  is  not  more  erudite  than  it  is  absorbing  in  its  interest.  It  has 
bad  an  immense  influence  upon  contemporary  thought  ;  and  has  approached 
its  task  with  an  unusual  mingling  of  the  reverent  and  the  scientific  spirit. 


"  That  the  '  Oriental  Peoples  '  had  legends  on  the  Creation,  the  Fall  of  Man,  the 
Deluge,  and  other  primitive  events,  there  is  no  denying.  Nor  is  there  any  need  of 
denying  it,  as  this  admirable  volume  shows.  Mr.  Lenormant  is  not  only  a  believer 
in  revelation,  but  a  devout  confessor  of  what  came  by  Moses  ;  as  well  as  of  what  came 
by  Christ.  In  this  explanation  of  Chaldean,  Babylonian,  Assyrian  and  Phenician 
tradition,  he  discloses  a  prodigality  of  thought  and  skill  allied  to  great  variety  of  pur- 
suit, and  diligent  manipulation  of  what  he  has  secured.  He  '  spoils  the  Egyptians  ' 
by  boldly  using  for  Christian  purposes  materials,  which,  if  left  unused,  might  be 
turned  against  the  credibility  of  the  Mosaic  records. 

"  From  the  mass  of  tradition  here  examined  it  would  seem  that  if  these  ancient 
legends  have  a  common  basis  of  truth,  the  first  part  of  Genesis  stands  more  generally 
related  to  the  religious  history  of  mankind,  than  if  it  is  taken  primarily  as  one  account, 
by  one  man,  to  one  people.  .  .  .  While  not  claiming  for  the  author  the 
setting  forth  of  the  absolute  truth,  nor  the  drawing  from  what  he  has  set  forth  the 
soundest  conclusions,  we  can  assure  our  readers  of  a  diminishing  fear  of  learned  un- 
belief after  the  perusal  of  this  work." — The  Neiv  Etiglander. 

"  With  reference  to  the  book  as  a  whole  it  may  be  said  :  (i).  That  nowhere  else  can 
one  obtain  the  mass  of  information  upon  this  subject  in  so  convenient  a  form;  (2).  That 
the  investigation  is  conducted  in  a  truly  scientific  manner,  and  with  an  eminently 
Christian  spirit  ;  (3').  That  the  results,  though  very  different  from  those  in  common 
acceptance,  contain  much  that  is  interesting  and  to  say  the  least,  plausible  ;  (4).  That 
the  author  while  he  seems  in  a  number  of  cases  to  be  injudicious  in  his  state- 
ments and  conclusions,  has  done  work  in  investigation  and  in  working  out  details  that 
w;ill  be  of  service  to  all,  whether  general  readers  or  specialists."— T/i^  Hebrew 
Studetit. 

"  The  work  is  one  that  deserves  to  be  studied  by  all  students  of  ancient  history,  and 
in  particular  by  ministers  of  the  Gospel,  whose  office  requires  them  to  interpret  the 
Scriptures,  and  who  ought  not  to  be  ignorant  of  the  latest  and  most  interesting  con- 
tribution of  science  to  the  elucidation  to  the  sacred  volume." — Ne7u  York  Tribune. 


*^  For  Sale  by  all  booksellers,  or  sent,  post-paid,  upon  receipt  of  price, 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S   SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


JLVTHOSIZEn    AMERICAN    EDITION, 


CHRISTIAN  INSTITUTIONS 

Essays    on     Ecclesiastical    Subjects. 
By     A.    P.     STANLEY,     D.D., 

Late  Dean  of  Westmitister. 


One  vol.,  crovrn  8vo,  Library  Edition,  $2.50  ;  Student's  Edition,  75c. 


The  work  includes  chapters  upon  Baptism,  the  Eucharist,  the  Eucharist 
in  the  Early  Church,  Eucharistic  Sacrifice,  the  Real  Presence,  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ,  Absolution,  Ecclesiastical  Vestments,  Basilicas,  the  Pope, 
the  Litany,  and  the  Belief  of  the  Early  Christians. 


•'They  have  all  an  antiquarian,  historical,  and  practical  interest,  and  are 
treated  in  a  very  liberal  and  very  attractive  style.  Dean  Stanley  is  a  genius 
as  well  as  a  scholar,  and  has  a  rare  power  of  word  painting.  His  History  of 
the  jfcwish  Church  and  of  the  Eastern  Church  are  as  interesting  and  enter- 
taining as  a  novel.  He  always  seizes  on  the  most  salient  points,  and 
gives  them  an  artistic  finish.  He  avoids  all  pedantry  of  learning,  and  all 
tedious  details." — Dr.  Schaff  in-  The  Critic. 

*'  No  scholar  of  taste,  no  lover  of  the  historic  art,  no  fine  antiquarian  will 
read  these  essays  without  grateful  emotions  and  manifold  ^xofiX.."—  Bosto7i 
Advertiser. 


DEAN    STANLEY'S 

The  History  of  the  Jewish  Church. 
With  maps  and  plans. 

Vol.  I.  From  Abraham  to  Samuel. 

Vol.  11.  From  Samuel  to  the  Cap- 
tivity. 

Vol.  III.  From  the  Captivity  to  the 
Christian  Era. 

Each  I  vol.,  crown,  8vo.,  per  vol.,  ^2  50. 

Westminster  Edition  of  the  History 
of  the  Jewish  Church.  Handsomely 
printed  on  superfine  paper,  and  tastefully 
bound.  Three  vols  ,  8vo.  (Sold  in  sets 
only.)    $9  00. 


OTHER    WORKS. 

The  History  of  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land.    8vo,  $1.50. 

The  History  of  the  Eastern  Church. 
With  an  Introduction  on  the  study  of 
Ecclesiastical  History.  Crown  Svo, 
§2.50. 

■Westminster  Sermons.  Sermons  on 
.special  occasions  preached  in  Westmin- 
ster Abbey,     i  vol.,  8vo,  $2.50. 

The  Life  and  Correspondence  of 
Thomas  Arnold,  D.D.,  late  Head 
Master  at  Rugby  School.  2  vols  in  one. 
Crown  Svo,  ^2.50. 


■  For  Sale  by  all  booksellers,  or  sent,  post-paid,  upon  receipt  of  price ^  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


The  Religions  of  the  Ancient  World 

Including  Egypt,  Assyria  and  Babylonia,  Persia,  India, 
Phoenicia,  Etruria,  Greece,  Rome. 

By   GEORGE    RAWLINSON,    M.A. 


One  Volume,  12mo,  _  _  -  -        $1,00, 

Uniform  with  "  The  Origin  of  Nations." 

Canon  Rawlinson's  great  learning  and  his  frequent  contribu- 
tions to  the  history  of  ancient  nations  qualify  him  to  treat  the 
subject  of  this  volume  with  a  breadth  of  view  and  accuracy  of 
knowledge  that  few  other  writers  can  lay  claim  to.  The  treatise 
is  not  intended  to  give  an  exhaustive  review  of  ancient  religions, 
but  to  enable  the  students  of  history  to  form  a  more  accurate 
apprehension  of  the  inner  life  of  the  ancient  world. 

"  The  historical  studies  which  have  elevated  this  author's  works  to  the 
highest  position  have  made  him  familiar  with  those  beliefs  which  once  di- 
rected the  world's  thought  ;  and  he  has  done  literature  no  better  service 
than  in  this  little  volume.  .  .  .  The  book  is,  then,  to  be  accepted 
as  a  sketch,  and 'as  the  most  trustworthy  sketch  in  our  language,  of  the  re- 
ligions discussed." — N.   Y,  Christian  Advocate. 

THE  ORIGIN  OF  NATIONS 

By  Professor  GEORGE  RAWLINSON,  M.A. 


One  Volume,  12mo,     With  maps,         -       -         $1,00, 


The  first  part  of  this  book,  Early  Civilizations,  discusses  the 
antiquity  of  civilization  in  Egypt  and  the  other  early  nations  of 
the  East.  The  second  part,  Ethnic  Affinities  in  the  Ancient 
World,  is  an  examination  of  the  ethnology  of  Genesis,  showing 
its  accordance  with  the  latest  results  of  modern  ethnographical 
science, 

"  An  attractive  volume,  which  is  well  worthy  of  the  careful  consideration 
of  every  reader." — Observe}-. 

"  A  work  of  genuine  scholarly  excellence  and  a  useful  offset  to  a  great 
deal  of  the  superficial  current  literature  on  such  subjects." 

—  Con gregatiofta  list. 

"  Dr.  Rawlmson  brings  to  this  discussion  long  and  patient  r^-search,  a 
vast  knowledge  and  intimate  acquaintance  with  wnat  has  been  written  on 
both  sides  of  the  question." — Brooklyn  Union- Argus. 

***  For  Sale  by   all  booksellers,  or  sent,  post-Jxiid,  upon  receipt  of  price,  by 


CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SOxNS,  Publishers 


743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


The  Theory  of  Preaching, 

OR 

LECTURES     ON     HOMILETICS. 

By    Professor    AUSTIN    PHELPS,    D.D. 


One  volume,  8vo,  _         _         _         -         _         $2.50 

This  work,  now  offered  to  the  public,  is  the  growth  of 
more  than  thirty  years'  practical  experience  in  teaching. 
While  primarily  designed  for  professional  readers,  it  will  be 
found  to  contain  much  that  will  be  of  interest  to  thoughtful 
laymen.  The  writings  of  a  master  of  style  of  broad  and 
catholic  mind  are  always  fascinating ;  in  the  present  case  the 
wealth  of  appropriate  and  pointed  illustration  renders  this 
doubly  the  case. 

CRITICAL     NOTICES. 

"In  the  range  of  Protestant  homiletical  literature,  we  venture  to  affirm  that  its  equal 
cannot  be  found  for  a  conscientious,  scholarly,  and  exhaustive  treatment  of  the  theory 
and  practice  of  preaching.  *  *  *  'fo  the  treatment  of  his  subject  Dr.  Phelps  brings 
su  h  qualifications  as  very  few  men  now  living  possess.  His  is  one  of  those  delicate  and 
sensitive  natures  wliich  are  instinctively  critical,  and  yet  full  of  what  Matthew  Arnold 
happily  calls  sweet  reasonableness.  *  *  *  To  this  characteristic  graciousness  of 
nature  Dr.  Phelps  adds  a  style  which  is  preeminently  adapted  to  his  special  work.  It  is 
nervous,  epigrammatic,  and  racy."— 77i^  Exuminer  and  Chronicle. 

"  It  is  a  wise,  spirited,  practical  and  devout  treatise  upon  a  topic  of  the  utmost  con- 
sequence to  pastors  and  people  alike,  and  to  the  salvation  of  mankind.  It  is  elaborate 
but  not  redundant,  rich  in  the  fruits  of  experience,  yet  thoroughly  timely  and  current, 
and  it  easily  takes  the  very  first  rank  among  volumes  of  its  class.  — 7-^^  Congrega- 
tionalist. 

"The  layman  will  find  it  delightful  reading,  and  ministers  of  all  denominations  and 
of  all  degrees  of  experience  will  rejoice  in  it  as  a  veritable  mine  of  wisdom."— iV>7f  York 
Christian  Ad7<ocate. 

"The  volume  is  to  be  commended  to  young  men  as  a  superb  example  of  the  art  in 
which  it  aims  to  instruct  them." — 'Ihe  I ndependent, 

"The  reading  of  it  is  a  mental  tonic.  The  preacher  cannot  but  feel  often  his  heart 
burning  withm  him  under  its  mfluence.  We  could  wish  it  might  be  in  the  hands  of  every 
theological  student  and  of  every  pastor."  —  The  Watchman. 

"  Thirty-one  years  of  experience  as  a  professor  of  homiletics  in  a  leading  American 
Theological  Seminary  by  a  man  of  genius,  learning  and  power,  are  condensed  ii  to  this 
valuable  volume.''''  —  Christian  Intelligencer. 

"  Our  professional  readers  will  make  a  great  mistake  if  they  suppose  this  volume  is 
simply  a  heavy,  monotonous  discussion,  chiefly  adapted  to  the  class-room.  It  is  a 
delightful  volume  for  general  reading.'' — Boston  Zion's  Herald. 


***  For   sale    by   all    booksellers.,    or   sent.,   post-paid.,    upon     receipt   oj 
'>rice.,  by 

CHARLES  SCRIBNER'S  SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


Men  and  Books ; 

OR,    STUDIES    IN     HOMILETICS 

Lectures  Introductory  to  the  "  Theory  of  Preaching." 
By  Professor  AUSTIN   PHELPS,  D.D. 


One    Volume.      Crown   8vo.  -  -  $r.CO 


Professor  Phelps'  second  volume  of  lectures  is  more  popular  and  gen- 
eral in  its  application  than  "The  Theory  of  Preaching."  It  is  devoted  to 
a  discussion  of  the  sources  of  culture  and  power  in  the  profession  of  the 
pulpit,  its  power  to  absorb  and  appropriate  to  its  own  uses  the  world  of 
real  life  in  the  present,  and  the  world  of  the  past,  as  it  lives  in  books. 

There  is  but  little  in  the  volume  that  is  not  just  as  valuable  to  all 
students  looking  forw^ard  to  a  learned  profession  as  to  theological  students, 
and  the  charm  of  the  style  and  the  lofty  tone  of  the  book  make  it  difficult 
to  lay  it  dow^n  when  it  is  once  taken  up. 


"  It  is  a  hook  obviously  free  from  all  padding;.  It  is  a  U7<e  book,  animated  as  well 
as  sound  and  instructive,  in  which  conventionalities  are  brushed  aside,  and  the  author 
goes  straight  to  the  marrow  of  the  subject.  No  minister  can  read  it  without  being  waked 
up  to  a  higher  conception  of  the  iJossibilities  of  his  calling." 

— Professor  George  P.  Fisher. 

"  It  is  one  of  the  mist  helpful  books  in  the  interests  of  self-cuUure  that  has  ever  been 
written.  While  specially  intende  1  for  young  clergymen,  it  is  almost  equally  well  adapted 
for  students  in  all  the  liberal  professions." — Standard  o/  the  Cross. 

"We  are  sure  that  no  minister  or  candidate  for  the  ministry'  can  read  it  without  profit. 
It  is  a  tonic  for  one's  mind  to  read  a  book  so  kidf^n  with  thought  and  suggestion,  and 
writien  in  a  style  so  fresh,  strong  and  bracing." — Bustoii   Watchman. 

"  Viewed  in  this  light,  for  their  orderly  and  wise  and  rich  suggestiveness,  these  lec- 
ture •  of  .Professor  Phelps  are  of  simply  incomparable  merit.  Every  page  is  crowded  with 
observaiioi.s  and  suggestions  of  striking  pertinence  and  force,  and  of  that  kind  of  wisdom 
which  touc  les  the  roots  of  a  matter.  Should  one  begin  to  make  quotations  illustrative  of 
this  remark,  there  would  be  no  end  of  them.  While  the  book  is  meant  specially  for  the 
preac  ler,  so  rich  is  it  in  saee  remark,  in  acute  discernment,  in  penetrating  observation  of 
how  m-n  are  most  apt  to  be  influenced,  and  what  are  the  most  telling  qualities  in  the  va- 
rious forms  of  literary  expression,  it  must  become  a  favorite  treatise  with  the  best  minds  in 
all  the  other  professions.  The  author  is.  in  a  very  high  sense  of  the  term,  an  artist,  as  for 
a  quarter  of  a  century  he  has  been  one  of  the  most  skillful  instructors  of  young  men  in 
that  which  is  the  noblest  of  all  the  arts." — Chicago  Advance, 


*.5f,*  For   sale    by   all    booksellers.^    or   sent.^   post-paid^    upon    receipt   o/ 
frice,  by 

CHARLES   SCRIBNER'S  SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


THE  WRITINGS  OF  GEORGE  P.  FISHER,  D.D. 

Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in  Yale  College. 

ESSAYS  ON  THE  SUPERNATURAL  ORIGIN  OF  CHRISTIANITY, 

With    special    references    to    the    theories    of    Renan,    Strauss,     and     the 
Tubingen    School. 

New  and  enlarged  edition.    One  Vol,    8vo,    $3. CO. 

"  Able  and  scholarly  essays  on  the  Supernatural  Origin  of  Christianity,  in  which 
Prof.  Fisher  discusses  such  subjects  as  the  genuineness  of  the  Gospel  of  John, 
Baur's  view  of  early  Christian  History  and  Literature,  and  the  mythical  theory  of 
Strauss." — North  American  Revieii'. 

THE    BEGINNINGS    OF    CHRISTIANITY, 

With  a  view   of  the   state   of  the    Roman   W^orld   at   the   Birth   of  Christ. 

One  Vol.    8vo,  .  ,  $3.00. 

"  Prof.  Fisher  has  displayed  in  this,  as  in  his  previous  published  writings,  that 
catholicity  and  that  calm  judicial  quality  of  mind  which  are  so  indispensable  to  a 
true  historical  critic,  and  so  natural  in  one,  who,  like  the  author,  is  a  loving  disciple 
of  the  revered  Neander." — Boston  Advertiser. 

HISTORY    OF    THE     REFORMATION. 

One  Vol,    8vo,  ,  ,  $3,00. 

From  Prof.  Charles  A.  Aiken.,  D.D..,  Princeton  Theological  Seminary, 
Prof.  Fisher's  History  of  the  Reforjiiatioti  presents  the  results  of  prolonged, 
extended,  and  exact  study  with  those  excellent  qualities  of  style,  which  are  so  char- 
acteristic of  him — clearness,  smoothness,  judicial  fairness,  vividness,  felicity  in  ar- 
ranging material,  as  well  as  in  grouping  and  delineating  characters.  It  must  become 
not  only  a  library  favoiite,  but  a  popular  manual  where  such  a  work  is  required  for 
instruction  and  study.     For  such  uses  it  seems  to  me  admirably  adapted. 

DISCUSSIONS    IN   HISTORY  AND  THEOLOGY. 

One  Vol.    8vo,  ,  .  $3.00. 

"  Prof.  Fisher  has  gathered  here  a  number  of  essays  on  subjects  connected  with 
those  departments  of  study  and  research  which  have  engaged  his  special  attention, 
and  in  which  he  has  made  himself  an  authority." 

FAITH    AND     RATIONALISM. 

One  Vol.    12m0f        .        $1.25. 

"  This  little  volume  may  be  regarded  as  virtually  a  primer  of  modern  religious 
thought,  which  contains  within  its  condensed  pages  rich  materials  that  are  not  easily 
gathered  from  the  great  volumes  of  our  theological  authors.  Alike  in  learning,  style 
and  power  of  discrimination,  it  is  honorable  to  the  author  and  to  his  university, 
which  does  not  urge  the  claims  of  science  by  slighting  the  worth  of  faith  or 
philosophy,"— "A^.  V.  Times. 

THE    CHRISTIAN     RELIGION. 

One    Vol.      12mo.      faper,   30   cts.      Cloth,   40   cfs. 

"  This  masterly  essay  of  Professor  Fisher  is  one  of  the  best  arguments  for 
Christianity  that  could  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  those  who  have  come  under 
influence  of  sceptical  writers. 


^#*  /■^or  Sale  by  all  booksellers,  or  sent,  post-paid,  upon  receipt  of  price.,  by 

CHARLES    SCRIBNER'S    SONS,  Publishers, 

743  AND  745  Broadway,  New  York. 


